Hi Quentin, pt., 16 maj 2025 o 17:27 Quentin Schulz <quentin.sch...@cherry.de> napisał(a): > > Hi Lukasz, > > On 5/15/25 5:55 PM, Lukasz Czechowski wrote: > > In case DEBUG UART is not used, define dummy macros replacing > > the actual function implementations that will not be available. > > This allows to compile code and avoid linker errors. > > Redefine the DEBUG_UART_FUNCS macro if DEBUG UART is not available, > > to avoid compilation errors. > > > > Signed-off-by: Lukasz Czechowski <lukasz.czechow...@thaumatec.com> > > --- > > include/debug_uart.h | 15 +++++++++++++++ > > 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/include/debug_uart.h b/include/debug_uart.h > > index 714b369e6fed..4526dca24ac6 100644 > > --- a/include/debug_uart.h > > +++ b/include/debug_uart.h > > @@ -128,6 +128,8 @@ void printdec(unsigned int value); > > (1 << CONFIG_DEBUG_UART_SHIFT), \ > > CONFIG_DEBUG_UART_SHIFT) > > > > +#ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_UART > > + > > /* > > * Now define some functions - this should be inserted into the serial > > driver > > */ > > @@ -197,4 +199,17 @@ void printdec(unsigned int value); > > _DEBUG_UART_ANNOUNCE \ > > } \ > > > > +#else > > + > > +#define DEBUG_UART_FUNCS > > + > > +#define printch(ch) (void)(ch) > > +#define printascii(str) (void)(str) > > +#define printhex2(value) (void)(value) > > +#define printhex4(value) (void)(value) > > +#define printhex8(value) (void)(value) > > +#define printdec(value) (void)(value) > > + > > There are a few additional functions that aren't redefined here: > > _printch > printhex1 > printhex > debug_uart_init > > any particular reason for not having included them?
Looking at the original code, _printch, printhex1 and printhex functions seem to be only used internally by other print functions, hence they are static (there are also no forward declarations of them in linux_uart,h, and I haven't seen any usage in the U-Boot code). The debug_uart_init function calls are, in most cases, guarded by CONFIG_DEBUG_UART, so it didn't trigger compilation errors for me. Do you think it's worth redefining it for consistency? > > Cheers, > Quentin Best regards, Lukasz
