Dear Scott Wood,
In message 20110131135548.50d65759@udp111988uds.am.freescale.net you wrote:
[Btw: "final" is probably not a technically correct term for all the use cases I see below.]
I meant final as compared to partial links, not anything to do with spl versus tpl versus the main image.
Do you have a better wording?
Not really. ld documentation also talks about "final binary" or "final executable". Note that I'm not insisting on a change here.
LDFLAGS += $(PLATFORM_LDFLAGS) +LDFLAGS_FINAL += -Bstatic $(LDFLAGS)
-LDFLAGS_u-boot += -Bstatic -T $(obj)u-boot.lds $(PLATFORM_LDFLAGS) +LDFLAGS_u-boot += -T $(obj)u-boot.lds $(LDFLAGS_FINAL)
Is it intentional that you change PLATFORM_LDFLAGS into LDFLAGS here?
Are you sure that this change is correct for all affected boards?
How has this change been tested?
As I understand it, it has only been limited to PLATFORM_LDFLAGS since the LDFLAGS_u-boot commit. Was that change intentional, and widely tested?
Can you please be more specific? I don't see where "the LDFLAGS_u-boot commit" (you mean 8aba9dc ?) would change any related code. The relevant hunk looks like this:
@@ -204,9 +204,11 @@ endif
AFLAGS := $(AFLAGS_DEBUG) -D__ASSEMBLY__ $(CPPFLAGS)
-LDFLAGS += -Bstatic -T $(obj)u-boot.lds $(PLATFORM_LDFLAGS) +LDFLAGS += $(PLATFORM_LDFLAGS) + +LDFLAGS_u-boot += -Bstatic -T $(obj)u-boot.lds $(PLATFORM_LDFLAGS) ifneq ($(CONFIG_SYS_TEXT_BASE),) -LDFLAGS += -Ttext $(CONFIG_SYS_TEXT_BASE) +LDFLAGS_u-boot += -Ttext $(CONFIG_SYS_TEXT_BASE) endif
# Location of a usable BFD library, where we define "usable" as
and this does not make any changes of PLATFORM_LDFLAGS into LDFLAGS or vice versa.
Best regards,
Wolfgang Denk