On Wed, Dec 16, 2020 at 07:10:58PM -0700, Simon Glass wrote: > Hi Tom, > > On Tue, 15 Dec 2020 at 09:28, Simon Glass <s...@chromium.org> wrote: > > > > Hi Tom, > > > > On Tue, 15 Dec 2020 at 07:06, Tom Rini <tr...@konsulko.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 08:50:53AM -0700, Simon Glass wrote: > > > > > > > Hi Tom, > > > > > > > > https://gitlab.denx.de/u-boot/custodians/u-boot-dm/-/pipelines/5567 > > > > > > > > > > > > Note this is for the 'next' tree. > > > > > > > > It includes the rename series which would be good to get in early. > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > Simon > > > > > > > > The following changes since commit > > > > ddaa94978583d07ec515e7226e397221d8cc44c8: > > > > > > > > Merge tag 'efi-next' of > > > > https://gitlab.denx.de/u-boot/custodians/u-boot-efi into next > > > > (2020-12-10 13:54:33 -0500) > > > > > > > > are available in the Git repository at: > > > > > > > > git://git.denx.de/u-boot-dm.git tags/dm-pull-14dec20 > > > > > > > > for you to fetch changes up to b7bbd553de0d9752f919dfc616f560f6f2504c14: > > > > > > > > checkpatch: Add warnings for unexpected struct names (2020-12-13 > > > > 16:51:09 -0700) > > > > > > > > > > In general, this is very good and we see small reductions almost > > > everywhere. In a few cases however we see: > > > 22: dm: core: Combine the flattree and livetree binding code > > > aarch64: (for 1/1 boards) all -212.0 spl/u-boot-spl:all +40.0 > > > spl/u-boot-spl:text +40.0 text -212.0 > > > px30-core-ctouch2-px30: all -212 spl/u-boot-spl:all +40 > > > spl/u-boot-spl:text +40 text -212 > > > u-boot: add: 1/-1, grow: 1/-3 bytes: 124/-336 (-212) > > > function old new > > > delta > > > ofnode_is_enabled - 92 > > > +92 > > > dm_scan_fdt_node 196 228 > > > +32 > > > dm_scan_fdt 52 32 > > > -20 > > > dm_scan_fdt_dev 104 20 > > > -84 > > > dm_extended_scan_fdt 236 132 > > > -104 > > > static.dm_scan_fdt_live 128 - > > > -128 > > > spl-u-boot-spl: add: 3/0, grow: 0/-4 bytes: 116/-76 (40) > > > function old new > > > delta > > > ofnode_next_subnode - 40 > > > +40 > > > ofnode_first_subnode - 40 > > > +40 > > > ofnode_is_enabled - 36 > > > +36 > > > dm_scan_fdt 20 16 > > > -4 > > > dm_scan_fdt_dev 36 20 > > > -16 > > > dm_scan_fdt_node 168 148 > > > -20 > > > dm_extended_scan_fdt 168 132 > > > -36 > > > > > > Is there anything we can do about that? That said: > > The problem here is that we are now using ofnode versions of those > three functions. The only thing I can do is inline them. It does make > things a little more complicated, but I think it is worth it. I'll > send a patch.
OK, thanks! -- Tom
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature