Dear Simon Glass,
In message CAPnjgZ2EjgHHnNj-0dyHgMMHhomYLuVJE=KF7pFCpwRSbDgY8g@mail.gmail.com you wrote:
CONFIG_SYS_X86_RESET_VECTOR - is this just another new, undocumented variable?
Yes it is new and undocumented, because it is internal to the x86 implementation and I don't want people to set it.
Then document it as internal and not to be touched, but documented it must be.
Well there are now two options:
- The user-facing CONFIG_NO_RESET_CODE option which, if not defined,
asserts CONFIG_SYS_X86_RESET_VECTOR 2. CONFIG_SYS_X86_RESET_VECTOR which is used in the Makefiles
I would rather have a single positive option (CONFIG_SYS_X86_RESET_VECTOR, as series v4). Failing that I would rather have ifneq in the Makefile (and just use CONFIG_NO_RESET_CODE). I am not sure how to have a negative option without an ifneq in the Makefile. I looked pretty hard but could not find an example in U-Boot.
First, you can #define CONFIG_SYS_X86_RESET_VECTOR in some global header file, and in the boards that don't want it add an #undef in the board config file.
Second, you can have some
RESET_OBJS-$(CONFIG_SYS_X86_RESET_VECTOR) = <your_list>
in your Makefile, and then use COBJS := $(sort $(COBJS-y) $(RESET_OBJS-))
which will include <your_list> only if CONFIG_SYS_X86_RESET_VECTOR is _not_ set or empty.
etc.
This is possible a minor point since I think Graeme said that the only other x86 board will move to Coreboot soon.
...for the time being, maybe. But we should not bar other options without serious need.
Best regards,
Wolfgang Denk