Wolfgang Denk wd@denx.de wrote on 2011/01/09 21:29:04:
Dear Joakim Tjernlund,
In message 1292838435-14958-4-git-send-email-Joakim.Tjernlund@transmode.se you wrote:
Only these 2 call sites depends on fixups for my mpc8321 based board.
Signed-off-by: Joakim Tjernlund Joakim.Tjernlund@transmode.se
arch/powerpc/cpu/mpc83xx/cpu_init.c | 2 +- arch/powerpc/lib/board.c | 2 +- 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/powerpc/cpu/mpc83xx/cpu_init.c b/arch/powerpc/cpu/mpc83xx/cpu_init.c index 7a1cae7..88d9dd8 100644 --- a/arch/powerpc/cpu/mpc83xx/cpu_init.c +++ b/arch/powerpc/cpu/mpc83xx/cpu_init.c @@ -507,7 +507,7 @@ int prt_83xx_rsr(void) sep = " "; for (i = 0; i < n; i++) if (rsr & bits[i].mask) {
printf("%s%s", sep, bits[i].desc);
printf("%s%s", sep, LINK_OFF(bits[i].desc)); sep = ", "; }Is my understanding correct that these changes are sufficient only for your board, and only for your current configuration? And that your code would break (resp. require more LINK_OFF fixups) if you would - for example - decide to enable CONFIG_DISPLAY_AER_FULL in your board configuration (cf. print_83xx_arb_event() above in the same source file) ?
It would break only if link address != load address. That is, if you want to use my new CONFIG_SYS_TRUE_PIC feature and be able to load u-boot at any address regardless of link address you would have to add LINK_OFF calls into print_83xx_arb_event() too if you want to use it.
I object against such a fragile and insular approach.
Considering you were tempted to add my previous approach which had LINK_OFF calls all over I don't see were this objection comes from. Have you changed your mind?
Jocke