Hi Masahiro,
On 4 October 2016 at 21:27, Masahiro Yamada yamada.masahiro@socionext.com wrote:
Hi Simon,
2016-10-05 0:37 GMT+09:00 Simon Glass sjg@chromium.org:
diff --git a/common/image-fdt.c b/common/image-fdt.c index 3d23608..91970d4 100644 --- a/common/image-fdt.c +++ b/common/image-fdt.c @@ -458,6 +458,11 @@ __weak int ft_verify_fdt(void *fdt) return 1; }
+__weak int arch_fixup_fdt(void *blob) +{
return 0;+}
Do we have to have a weak function? I was hoping we could avoid these since they make it hard to figure out at build time what code is executed.
This hunk is just reverting Michal's commit e2f88dfd2d9671.
Is it better to add an empty stub to every architecture that may call it?
IMO all the FDT fixups need work. Perhaps we need a linker list approach so we can declare these fixups more easily? Or perhaps that will just make things harder to figure out?
But in this case I'm keen to avoid going back to using a weak function. Can we do that?
Regards, Simon