Hi Quentin,
On Mon, 22 Jul 2024 at 07:11, Quentin Schulz quentin.schulz@cherry.de wrote:
Hi Simon,
On 7/21/24 5:25 PM, Simon Glass wrote:
These should have a CONFIG_ prefix. Add it.
Signed-off-by: Simon Glass sjg@chromium.org Fixes: 7a0d88076b9 ("Add in the ability to load and boot an uncompr...") Reviewed-by: Sean Anderson seanga2@gmail.com
(no changes since v1)
common/spl/spl.c | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/common/spl/spl.c b/common/spl/spl.c index 7794ddccade..6f4a8bfb3f4 100644 --- a/common/spl/spl.c +++ b/common/spl/spl.c @@ -322,7 +322,7 @@ int spl_parse_image_header(struct spl_image_info *spl_image, #endif
#if CONFIG_IS_ENABLED(OS_BOOT) -#if defined(CMD_BOOTI) +#if defined(CONFIG_CMD_BOOTI)
Maybe use IS_ENABLED(CMD_BOOTI) instead?
IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_CMD_BOOTI) I assume. Sure, but I don't think it matters as they are equivalent.
ulong start, size; if (!booti_setup((ulong)header, &start, &size, 0)) {@@ -336,7 +336,7 @@ int spl_parse_image_header(struct spl_image_info *spl_image, spl_image->load_addr, spl_image->size); return 0; } -#elif defined(CMD_BOOTZ) +#elif defined(CONFIG_CMD_BOOTZ)
Ditto?
In any case,
Reviewed-by: Quentin Schulz quentin.schulz@cherry.de
Though.... i'm wondering why we are checking for CMD_BOOTI in SPL in the first place?
I suppose it is to enable a feature in SPL only if it will be used in U-Boot?
ulong start, end; if (!bootz_setup((ulong)header, &start, &end)) {
Regards, Simon