On Fri, 26 Jul 2024 at 05:02, Simon Glass <s...@chromium.org> wrote: > > Hi Sughosh, > > On Wed, 24 Jul 2024 at 00:04, Sughosh Ganu <sughosh.g...@linaro.org> wrote: > > > > With the introduction of separate config symbols for the SPL phase of > > U-Boot, the condition checks need to be tweaked so that platforms that > > enable the LMB module in SPL are also able to call the LMB API's. Use > > the appropriate condition checks to achieve this. > > > > Signed-off-by: Sughosh Ganu <sughosh.g...@linaro.org> > > --- > > Changes since rfc: > > * Replace conditional compilation of lmb code to an if > > (CONFIG_IS_ENABLED()) in store_block() and tftp_init_load_addr(). > > > > board/xilinx/common/board.c | 2 +- > > boot/bootm.c | 4 ++-- > > boot/image-board.c | 2 +- > > fs/fs.c | 4 ++-- > > lib/Makefile | 2 +- > > net/tftp.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++------------------- > > net/wget.c | 4 ++-- > > 7 files changed, 29 insertions(+), 29 deletions(-) > > Same question as previous patch...do any platforms need lmb in SPL?
Same answer as my other two emails. This was called for by the maintainers. -sughosh > > The cover letter says "The LMB module is enabled by default for the > main U-Boot image, while it needs to be enabled for SPL." but I don't > really understand that. > > Regards, > Simon
