pardon yet another question on coding style and pedantry, but i'm curious about the following. i'm crawling through the code in common/image-fdt.c, specifically in image_setup_libfdt(), and first i see the following:

__weak int arch_fixup_fdt(void *blob) { return 0; }

... snip ...

if (arch_fixup_fdt(blob) < 0) { printf("ERROR: arch-specific fdt fixup failed\n"); goto err; }

which is perfectly understandable -- use the weak function attribute, and let each architecture decide if it wants to override that. same thing here in that same file:

__weak int ft_verify_fdt(void *fdt) { return 1; }

... snip ...

if (!ft_verify_fdt(blob)) goto err;

which then makes me wonder why the same approach wasn't used for these routines as well:

if (IMAGE_OF_BOARD_SETUP) { fdt_ret = ft_board_setup(blob, gd->bd); if (fdt_ret) { printf("ERROR: board-specific fdt fixup failed: %s\n", fdt_strerror(fdt_ret)); goto err; } } if (IMAGE_OF_SYSTEM_SETUP) { fdt_ret = ft_system_setup(blob, gd->bd); if (fdt_ret) { printf("ERROR: system-specific fdt fixup failed: %s\n", fdt_strerror(fdt_ret)); goto err; } }

couldn't ft_board_setup() and ft_system_setup() have been defined the same way? or is there something different about those two routines that wouldn't allow the weak function attribute and do away with all the OF_BOARD_SETUP and OF_SYSTEM_SETUP usage?

rday