[U-Boot] [PATCH] armv7: Move save_boot_params_default() to start.S
save_boot_params() is called by start.S, so move its default implementation to this file too. This is also useful for boards willing to use nand_spl since cpu.c is not built in this case.
Signed-off-by: Benoît Thébaudeau benoit.thebaudeau@advansee.com Cc: Albert Aribaud albert.u.boot@aribaud.net --- .../arch/arm/cpu/armv7/cpu.c | 7 ------- .../arch/arm/cpu/armv7/start.S | 7 +++++++ 2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
diff --git u-boot-4d3c95f.orig/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/cpu.c u-boot-4d3c95f/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/cpu.c index c6fa8ef..b0677f4 100644 --- u-boot-4d3c95f.orig/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/cpu.c +++ u-boot-4d3c95f/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/cpu.c @@ -37,13 +37,6 @@ #include <asm/cache.h> #include <asm/armv7.h>
-void save_boot_params_default(u32 r0, u32 r1, u32 r2, u32 r3) -{ -} - -void save_boot_params(u32 r0, u32 r1, u32 r2, u32 r3) - __attribute__((weak, alias("save_boot_params_default"))); - int cleanup_before_linux(void) { /* diff --git u-boot-4d3c95f.orig/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/start.S u-boot-4d3c95f/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/start.S index aee27fd..6df9c91 100644 --- u-boot-4d3c95f.orig/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/start.S +++ u-boot-4d3c95f/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/start.S @@ -119,6 +119,13 @@ FIQ_STACK_START: IRQ_STACK_START_IN: .word 0x0badc0de
+.globl save_boot_params_default +save_boot_params_default: + mov pc, lr + +.weak save_boot_params +save_boot_params = save_boot_params_default + /* * the actual reset code */
On Fri, Aug 10, 2012 at 11:59:09PM +0200, Beno??t Th??baudeau wrote:
save_boot_params() is called by start.S, so move its default implementation to this file too. This is also useful for boards willing to use nand_spl since cpu.c is not built in this case.
Signed-off-by: Beno??t Th??baudeau benoit.thebaudeau@advansee.com Cc: Albert Aribaud albert.u.boot@aribaud.net
We should pick up http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/169561/ instead as yours is missing START/ENDPROC and doesn't just declare the initial implementation weak.
On Sat, Aug 11, 2012 at 12:44:34 AM +0200, Tom Rini wrote:
On Fri, Aug 10, 2012 at 11:59:09PM +0200, Benoît Thébaudeau wrote:
save_boot_params() is called by start.S, so move its default implementation to this file too. This is also useful for boards willing to use nand_spl since cpu.c is not built in this case.
Signed-off-by: Benoît Thébaudeau benoit.thebaudeau@advansee.com Cc: Albert Aribaud albert.u.boot@aribaud.net
We should pick up http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/169561/ instead as yours is missing START/ENDPROC
Yes.
and doesn't just declare the initial implementation weak.
What do you mean? It does: +.weak save_boot_params
One version or the other, I don't care as long as one of them is applied. Why has Tetsuyuki's patch still not been applied? You've ack'ed it on 7/9.
Best regards, Benoît
On 08/10/2012 04:12 PM, Benoît Thébaudeau wrote:
On Sat, Aug 11, 2012 at 12:44:34 AM +0200, Tom Rini wrote:
On Fri, Aug 10, 2012 at 11:59:09PM +0200, Benoît Thébaudeau wrote:
save_boot_params() is called by start.S, so move its default implementation to this file too. This is also useful for boards willing to use nand_spl since cpu.c is not built in this case.
Signed-off-by: Benoît Thébaudeau benoit.thebaudeau@advansee.com Cc: Albert Aribaud albert.u.boot@aribaud.net
We should pick up http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/169561/ instead as yours is missing START/ENDPROC
Yes.
and doesn't just declare the initial implementation weak.
What do you mean? It does: +.weak save_boot_params
Yes, but you add save_boot_params_default and alias it. That's extra work we don't need :)
One version or the other, I don't care as long as one of them is applied. Why has Tetsuyuki's patch still not been applied? You've ack'ed it on 7/9.
Bad timing around the v2012.07 release. If Albert doesn't pick it up next time he goes around I'll add it to a staging tree and send a request.
participants (2)
-
Benoît Thébaudeau -
Tom Rini