On Thu, Mar 06, 2014 at 15:26 +0100, Hannes Petermaier wrote:
--- a/common/lcd.c +++ b/common/lcd.c @@ -400,12 +400,12 @@ __weak int lcd_get_size(int *line_length)
int drv_lcd_init(void) {
struct stdio_dev lcddev;
int rc;
lcd_base = (void *) gd->fb_base;
lcd_init(lcd_base); /* LCD initialization */
+#ifndef CONFIG_LCD_NOSTDOUT
struct stdio_dev lcddev;
int rc;
/* Device initialization */ memset(&lcddev, 0, sizeof(lcddev));
What do language lawyers say about declarations after instructions within blocks? This looks somewhat fishy.
@@ -419,6 +419,9 @@ int drv_lcd_init(void) rc = stdio_register(&lcddev);
return (rc == 0) ? 1 : rc; +#else
- return 0;
+#endif }
This (continuation from the above #ifndef) somehow reads like inverted logic. It appears like "ifdef NOSTDOUT" is a shortcut, not a strict alternative as the patch suggests.
In general U-Boot tries to get away from the multitude of ifdefs where possible. I'm afraid adding a new one needs a very good reason to get perceived as welcome.
virtually yours Gerhard Sittig