Hi all, Apologies for the delay in response, I've been working on a high priority issue.
On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 4:02 PM, Christian Riesch <christian.rie...@omicron.at> wrote: > Hi, > > > On Thursday, July 26, 2012, Aneesh V wrote: >> >> Hi Tyler, >> >> On 07/26/2012 11:54 AM, Tyler Olmstead wrote: >>> >>> Hi Christian, >>> >>> On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 10:03 AM, Christian Riesch >>> <christian.rie...@omicron.at> wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> [cc'd Prabhakar Lad, Tom Rini, and Scott Wood] >>>> >>>> Tyler, >>>> >>>> On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 5:37 PM, Tyler Olmstead >>>> <tyler.j.olmst...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Hi all, >>>>> >>>>> I have encountered some issues adding a board-specific command to the >>>>> board file of a project I have been working on. Specifically, after >>>>> adding a U-Boot shell command to my board file, I have been seeing >>>>> link-stage failures when attempting to build SPL. >>>> >>>> >>>> It's hard to tell without having your code, but I think this problem >>>> was already discussed in [1]. However I do not remember how Prabhakar >>>> solved it in the end. >>> >>> >>> Yes, I ran into this thread while debugging the problem, which >>> ultimately lead me to my solution. From that same thread [1], Wolfgang >>> Denk writes: >>> >>> <quote> >>>> >>>> >>>> *I want to add a command using U_BOOT_CMD in uboot, where SPL_BUILD is >>>> enabled for example for da850evm in spl frame work how can i do that * >>> >>> >>> This makes no sense. Commands can only be executed when we have full >>> U-Boot running (actually even only after relocation). You cannot run >>> commands in the SPL. >>> </quote> >>> >>> I understand of course why it makes no sense to have command support >>> in the SPL. However, the crux of this problem is that U-Boot and SPL >>> both link in the same board object file, so in that sense compile-time >>> switches wont work. From later in [1], Scott Wood writes: >> >> >> No that's not correct. For SPL we build the object files into a >> different directory "spl/". Please see the below in spl/Makefile Yes, thank you for correcting me. Also, I had confused CONFIG_SPL and CONFIG_SPL_BUILD. >> >> # We want the final binaries in this directory >> obj := $(OBJTREE)/spl/ >> >> Object files used for U-Boot and SPL are not the same. You can use >> compile-time switches and it should work just fine. > > > Thanks for pointing that out, Aneesh. > > Therefore an #ifndef CONFIG_SPL_BUILD would work for Tyler's problem and I > think that it's also easier to read than some build magic that removes > u-boot commands. > > Christian > Yes, the #ifndef works perfectly for me. However, I also agree with your sentiment regarding build magic, which is why I wonder if removing the $GEN_UBOOT linker magic from the SPL makefile wouldn't be the best approach. If this was done, then my U-Boot command wouldn't have been linked into SPL in the first place, it wouldn't require any cluttering of #ifdef's, and would eliminate the potential of others encountering this same problem. This seems reasonable given that SPL shouldn't contain any command support. Thoughts? >> >> >> -Aneesh >> >> _______________________________________________ >> U-Boot mailing list >> U-Boot@lists.denx.de >> http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
