Hi Viktor, On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 9:46 AM, Viktor Křivák <viktor.kri...@gmail.com> wrote: > Dear Timur Tabi, > > 2012/3/27 Marek Vasut <ma...@denx.de>: >> Dear Timur Tabi, >> >>> Marek Vasut wrote: >>> > Agreed, but I expected there was some dead code and that was the point I >>> > was trying to express ;-) >>> >>> Well, until you do a thorough analysis, you really have no idea if there >>> is any dead code at all. >> >> I don't ... but Viktor probably does and I believe that's what he wants to >> ask >> about. > > Yes I do the analysis, actually only one method is used > (PCI_mapBIOSImage), but there are two other methods related to video > card. Booth in file drivers/bios_emulator/atibios.c (PCI_mapBIOSImage, > PCI_unmapBIOSImage). Nothing calls they but I think they can be > preserved too. > > But there are a lots of other code which can be removed. For example > BE_mapRealPointer() from drivers/bios_emulator/biosemu.c or > BE_getVESABuf() from same file. So my question is: It is safe remove > dead code or somebody can use it for debugging purposes ? I've got > same problem with another driver so this is general question.
What exactly is the problem? Wolfgang previously pointed out: "Did you check if you really find any such code in your linked image? As I already explained, normally -ffunction-sections / -fdata-sections with --gc-sections should make sure any unused functions get dropped automatically." If these linker options successfully remove all of the dead code, then there should be no urgency in removing it. However, if you are experiencing compile errors due to unused functions, then yes, removing the dead code should be investigated. But if you plan to remove any code, make sure that there are no other boards which may potentially use the code you plan to remove Regards, Graeme _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
