Mike, On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 10:15 AM, Mike Frysinger <vap...@gentoo.org> wrote:
> what is the difference in compiled sizes ? if the abstracted funcs add > negligible overhead, i think merging these locally in the bootm code might > make sense in a pure clean up sense ... > Compared to the simple version I just posted and my latest attempt to address your review comments (and pulling in the newest version of my patches): Simple version: 168820 bytes With munging functions abstracted: 169184 bytes ...so 364 bytes. It might be smaller if I actually inlined my functions into bootm. How about this for a plan? Wolfgang can see if he wants to apply my "simple" fix to use malloc(). If so, great! ...at least the bug will be fixed. :) ...then, we can decide if we want to add the abstract munging tools and where to add them (either a separate lib/cmdline.c file or direct into bootm). If you want them, I'll submit a patch with all of your review feedback addressed and a second patch to change fixup_silent_linux() to use them (with a better description). ...we can think about the earlyprintk and looping questions after the above have been addressed. -Doug
_______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
