On 1/14/2014 6:39 AM, Scott Wood wrote:
On Mon, 2014-01-13 at 11:58 +0530, Prabhakar Kushwaha wrote:
On 1/10/2014 7:40 AM, Po Liu wrote:
diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/fsl_ifc_spl.c b/drivers/mtd/nand/fsl_ifc_spl.c index 9de327b..6b43496 100644 --- a/drivers/mtd/nand/fsl_ifc_spl.c +++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/fsl_ifc_spl.c @@ -88,7 +88,11 @@ static inline int bad_block(uchar *marker, int port_size) return __raw_readw((u16 *)marker) != 0xffff; }
-static void nand_load(unsigned int offs, int uboot_size, uchar *dst) +#ifdef CONFIG_TPL_BUILD +int nand_spl_load_image(uint32_t offs, unsigned int uboot_size, void *vdst) +#else +static int nand_load(uint32_t offs, unsigned int uboot_size, void *vdst) +#endif
nand_load definition is static void nand_load(unsigned int offs, int uboot_size, uchar *dst);
Not anymore...
Just confused with previous fsl_ifc_spl.c file. Actually this patch is changing nand_load signature.
No warning. I checked for BSC9131RDB, P1010 NAND target.
Thanks, Prabhakar