On Saturday 13 June 2009, Mike Frysinger wrote:
See above. There already *IS* such an #ifdef, but it's just not cluttering up the guts of that driver.
you adding MUST have NO size impact on other board
if we apply you code as it we will increase the size of u-boot for every rm9200 board that use the ethernet
Not on any compiler I've used for at least the past dozen years or so.
i dont get it. the CPP expands into if(0) and unless you have a completely shitty compiler, gcc will do dead code elimination on it resulting in the same binary size.
I've seen to much "shitty version" that does not do it correctly so I prefer ot avoid the problem
Which compiler versions are that broken? And are used regularly to build rm9200 U-Boot code? At normal optimization levels? (We know that disabling optimization puts out all kinds of crap.)
This is really basic stuff: "if (0) { dead } else { live }" and the converse.
i'm pretty sure we're already relying on this behavior. so you've got a bigger problem that needs addressing (i.e. shit can that compiler) than what David is proposing.
I know that when Linux started relying on that type of dead-code elimination quite a few years back, nobody thought this was a real issue. And Linux is, on the whole, far more demanding of compilers than U-Boot.