Stefan Reinauer wrote: > * Marc Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [070719 23:52]: > >> I only think that this is a problem with initram because it links to >> stage0. Maybe we should reconsider that. Maybe it needs to stand alone. >> Marc >> > > There are a few functions that we might want to share: > > - printk > - the lar functions (?? not sure, maybe not even those.) > - what else? > > One thing we had in v2 was 6 incarnations of print(k), each in 10 > incarnations, one for each log level. That made 60 functions just for > pushing a few letters of _debug_ to the _developer_. > > Maybe we have to duplicate printk in the binary, but we should try to > keep it one incarnation in the code. > > If it is only for printk, setting up a jump table is maybe not worth it. > > Though stage2 will have one, too. > > Modular design and it's advantages and disadvantages. I think we should > try to go the "defined interface to stage0" way, as Juergen also > suggested (I dont think this is a hack) > > If it is only for printk then I don't think it is worth it. I don't think that initram would need lar functions but stage2 and a payload might. Marc
-- Marc Jones Senior Software Engineer (970) 226-9684 Office mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.amd.com/embeddedprocessors -- linuxbios mailing list [email protected] http://www.linuxbios.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
