From: Zong Li zong.li@sifive.com Sent: Tuesday, November 29, 2022 10:02 AM To: Sean Anderson seanga2@gmail.com Cc: sjg@chromium.org; michal.simek@amd.com; sean.anderson@seco.com; Leo Yu-Chi Liang(梁育齊) ycliang@andestech.com; Rick Jian-Zhi Chen(陳建志) rick@andestech.com; u-boot@lists.denx.de Subject: Re: [PATCH] riscv: use imply instead of select for SPL_SEPARATE_BSS

On Mon, Nov 21, 2022 at 8:17 PM Zong Li zong.li@sifive.com wrote:

...

On Mon, Nov 21, 2022 at 12:00 PM Sean Anderson seanga2@gmail.com wrote:

...

On 11/16/22 02:08, Zong Li wrote:

...

Use imply instead of select, then it can still be disabled by board-specific defconfig, or be set to n manually.

Signed-off-by: Zong Li zong.li@sifive.com

arch/Kconfig | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/arch/Kconfig b/arch/Kconfig index ae39716697..102956d24c 100644 --- a/arch/Kconfig +++ b/arch/Kconfig @@ -111,7 +111,7 @@ config RISCV select SUPPORT_OF_CONTROL select OF_CONTROL select DM

• select SPL_SEPARATE_BSS if SPL
  

• imply SPL_SEPARATE_BSS if SPL
  imply DM_SERIAL
  imply DM_ETH
  imply DM_EVENT
  

Do you have an example of a board which does this?

Hi Sean, We'd like to disable 'SPL_SEPARATE_BSS' on our internal platforms that don't exist in the mainline. It seems to me that using 'imply' might be not only working on the mainline's board, but also making it flexible to disable 'SPL_SEPARATE_BSS' by board-specific configuration or disable it manually for debug purposes. Hope the idea is good to you all. Thanks

Hi all, Thanks for your reviewing, could I know whether this patch makes sense to you?

It's reasonable for me.

Thanks, Rick

...

...

--Sean