On Sunday, September 11, 2011 16:13:26 Andrew Murray wrote:
> On 11 September 2011 20:22, Mike Frysinger <vap...@gentoo.org> wrote:
> > On Saturday, September 10, 2011 10:57:47 Andrew Murray wrote:
> > > --- a/common/cmd_bootm.c
> > > +++ b/common/cmd_bootm.c
> > > 
> > >               if (load == blob_start || load == image_start) {
> > >                       ..........
> > > -             } else {
> > > +             } else if (load != image_start) {
> > 
> > sorry, but why does this new if() make any sense ?  the only way this
> > else branch could execute is if load != image_start since load ==
> > image_start was
> > explicitly handled in the first if check.
> 
> Yes that's correct. The move is executed and a print statement displayed -
> only when the load address differs from the image start address. In other
> words the patch prevents unnecessary/confusing output and a call to a
> function that doesn't do anything when load == image_start.

i think you missed my point.  your proposed change to the "else" branch makes 
no difference to the existing code.

current code:
if (load == image_start) {
        ...
} else {
        ...
}

your new code:
if (load == image_start) {
        ...
} else if (load != image_start) {
        ...
}

your change to the if statement is pointless ?
-mike

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

_______________________________________________
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot

Reply via email to