Hi Daniel, Sorry not to have followed up earlier. I was sick in bed.
On Mon, 24 Mar 2014 21:35:15 +0100 Daniel Schwierzeck daniel.schwierzeck@gmail.com wrote:
2014-03-24 7:35 GMT+01:00 Masahiro Yamada yamada.m@jp.panasonic.com:
Thanks for your effort. I think basicly we're going to the right direction. But I am afraind more careful check is necessary before posting the series.
I did build test on your patches on kconfig-support branch. I noticed many boards would be broken:
- ARM
cm_t335 am335x_boneblack am335x_evm am335x_evm_nor am335x_evm_norboot am335x_evm_spiboot am335x_evm_uart1 am335x_evm_uart2 am335x_evm_uart3 am335x_evm_uart4 am335x_evm_uart5 am335x_evm_usbspl h2200 palmld palmtc palmtreo680 zipitz2 vpac270_ond_256 mx31ads lubbock
- AVR32
favr-32-ezkit
- Blackfin
bf527-ad7160-eval
- PowerPC
MVBLUE hermes svm_sc8xx ESTEEM192E ELPT860 FPS850L FPS860L NSCU SM850 TK885D TQM823L TQM823L_LCD TQM823M TQM850L TQM850M TQM855L TQM855M TQM860L TQM860M TQM862L TQM862M TQM866M TQM885D TTTech virtlab2 wtk MVSMR GENIETV )
Those boards have linker errors, but I do not understand yet why. For example on ARM the linker complains about multiple definition of board_init() and board_eth_init(). The solely difference is that there are one or two additional intermediate objects (board/built-in.o and if necessary board/VENDOR/built-in.o). But board/built-in.o and board/BOARD/built-in.o respectively board/VENDOR/BOARD/built-in.o contain the same symbols and object code. The strange thing is that the error only affects some boards.
Have you figured out the multiple definition error?
They are nasty ones and have their own linker scripts. :-( For cm_t335 board, board/compulab/cm_t335/u-boot.lds needs modifying.
--- a/board/compulab/cm_t335/u-boot.lds +++ b/board/compulab/cm_t335/u-boot.lds @@ -19,7 +19,7 @@ SECTIONS { *(.__image_copy_start) CPUDIR/start.o (.text*) - board/compulab/cm_t335/built-in.o (.text*) + board/built-in.o (.text*) *(.text*) }
Best Regards Masahiro Yamada