Hi Mike,
On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 8:01 AM, Mike Frysinger <vap...@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On Saturday 04 February 2012 22:02:45 Troy Kisky wrote:
>
> since we preprocess our linker scripts now, i'd suggest using #include rather
> than INCLUDE
+1
>> --- /dev/null
>> +++ b/u-boot-common.lds
>>
>> + . = ALIGN(4);
>> + __u_boot_cmd_start = .;
>> + .u_boot_cmd : {
>> + KEEP(*(.u_boot_cmd))
>> + }
>> + __u_boot_cmd_end = .;
>
> rather than storing this in the top level dir, i'd suggest going the linux
> route and add a include/asm-generic/u-boot.lds.h header. then we can migrate
Except it's not a 'header' :) - include/asm-generic/u-boot.lds (or maybe
u-boot.lds.common) should be what is included in u-boot.lds and
include/asm-generic/u-boot.lds.h should be the externs for the symbols
exported from the linker script
> people over time and piece by piece without having to worry about breaking
> everyone at once ...
Here we go again ;) - Queue the 'what incentive will maintainers have to
migrate to the common case' discussion...
On a (related) side not, do we need to lay down some ground rules for
migrating to 'common' case? There seems to be a fair amount of new 'common
code' or 'common architecture' being developed, but only being applied to
one arch. I'm guilty too - my init sequence cleanups which lay the
foundation for a common init sequence are only implemented for x86.
> that also allows us to cater to arches (like Blackfin) that have a symbol
> prefix
> (underscore in the Blackfin case). add the VMLINUX_SYMBOL() macro, and then
> this code will look like:
> VMLINUX_SYMBOL(__u_boot_cmd_end) = .;
> (i picked VMLINUX_SYMBOL() only because that's what Linux already has defined)
How about U_BOOT_LDS_SYMBOL()?
Regards,
Graeme
_______________________________________________
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
