Dear Daniel Schwierzeck, In message <CACUy__VhV1_eXGW1NuSgLEB1nyVJ51xUXa0vwbY3Tdb=kvm...@mail.gmail.com> you wrote: > > >> +# Allow compiling of C and ASM code parts in different way. > >> +# Serves also as a replacement for CONFIG_PRELOADER. > >> +ifneq ($(CONFIG_UBOOT_SPL_BUILD),) > >> +CPPFLAGS += -DCONFIG_UBOOT_SPL_BUILD > >> +endif > > > > I don't understand this comment. > > Currently we have CONFIG_PRELOADER (and maybe others?) to conditionally > compile start.S and other code. The idea here is to consolidate those defines > and to use a common name convention for SPL. My suggestion is something > like CONFIG_UBOOT_SPL_BUILD. Are there better ideas?
No, I agree with you. I just don't understand the comment above, i. e. in which way does this "allow compiling of C and ASM code parts in different way"? CPPFLAGS applies the same to .c and .S files, and I don't see a how this setting would cause different options to be used for C versus assembler code. Best regards, Wolfgang Denk -- DENX Software Engineering GmbH, MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: w...@denx.de Looks clean and obviously correct to me, but then _everything_ I write always looks obviously correct to me. - Linus Torvalds in <pine.lnx.4.10.10012090054360.791-100...@penguin.transmeta.com> _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
