Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 1/3] common: add ifdefs around bouncebuf.c body
Dear Stephen Warren, On 11/06/2012 03:57 PM, Marek Vasut wrote: Dear Stephen Warren, On 11/06/2012 03:43 PM, Marek Vasut wrote: Dear Stephen Warren, On 11/05/2012 05:54 PM, Marek Vasut wrote: Dear Stephen Warren, From: Stephen Warren swar...@nvidia.com If a U-Boot config file enables CONFIG_BOUNCE_BUFFER only for the main U-Boot build and not for the SPL, then config.mk will contain CONFIG_BOUNCE_BUFFER=y, so common/Makefile will build bouncebuf.c for both the SPL and main U-Boot, but config.h won't set CONFIG_BOUNCE_BUFFER for the SPL, so bouncebuf.h will provide static inline functions, which will conflict with the compiled bouncebuf.c. Solve this by guarding the body of bouncebuf.c with the ifdef to avoid conflicts. Uh, don't you want the bounce buffer not compiled in for SPL? Then maybe add CONFIG_SPL_BOUNCE_BUFFER to force BB to be compiled into SPL or something ... Not compiling bouncebuf.c for SPL would solve this too. I have no idea what build system contortions would be required to do this though. Do you think the build system should be fixed first rather than taking this series/patch? I guess we shouldn't need a separate CONFIG_SPL_BOUNCE_BUFFER option though; we should rather simply set CONFIG_SPL_BOUNCE_BUFFER appropriately for SPL and non-SPL, and have everything key off that one variable, right? How will you be able to configure it separately for spl and non-spl ? For example, include/configs/trimslice.h contains: /* SD/MMC */ #define CONFIG_MMC #define CONFIG_GENERIC_MMC #define CONFIG_TEGRA_MMC #define CONFIG_CMD_MMC However, we don't use MMC in our SPL, but don't want to pollute every Tegra board file with ifdefs for SPL, so include/configs/tegra-common-post.h (which is included at the end of trimslice.h) contains: #ifdef CONFIG_SPL_BUILD ... /* remove MMC support */ #ifdef CONFIG_MMC #undef CONFIG_MMC #endif #ifdef CONFIG_GENERIC_MMC #undef CONFIG_GENERIC_MMC #endif #ifdef CONFIG_TEGRA_MMC #undef CONFIG_TEGRA_MMC #endif #ifdef CONFIG_CMD_MMC #undef CONFIG_CMD_MMC #endif ... #endif And in the V1 patch I proposed to tegra-common-post.h, I added the following at the end: #ifdef CONFIG_TEGRA_MMC #define CONFIG_BOUNCE_BUFFER #endif Yet, this doesn't solve the problem with SPL ... since for SPL, you'd have to do ifdef CONFIG_SPL, no? Sorry, what problem with the SPL is this not solving? I think I was tired when replying (sorry, the conference is really heavy on me). I though you wanted to disable BB only for SPL, but now I see BB being enabled depends on tegra mmc. btw. shouldn't --gc-sections remove BB code if it's not used at all? Best regards, ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 1/3] common: add ifdefs around bouncebuf.c body
On 11/07/2012 06:21 AM, Marek Vasut wrote: Dear Stephen Warren, On 11/06/2012 03:57 PM, Marek Vasut wrote: Dear Stephen Warren, On 11/06/2012 03:43 PM, Marek Vasut wrote: Dear Stephen Warren, On 11/05/2012 05:54 PM, Marek Vasut wrote: Dear Stephen Warren, From: Stephen Warren swar...@nvidia.com If a U-Boot config file enables CONFIG_BOUNCE_BUFFER only for the main U-Boot build and not for the SPL, then config.mk will contain CONFIG_BOUNCE_BUFFER=y, so common/Makefile will build bouncebuf.c for both the SPL and main U-Boot, but config.h won't set CONFIG_BOUNCE_BUFFER for the SPL, so bouncebuf.h will provide static inline functions, which will conflict with the compiled bouncebuf.c. Solve this by guarding the body of bouncebuf.c with the ifdef to avoid conflicts. Uh, don't you want the bounce buffer not compiled in for SPL? Then maybe add CONFIG_SPL_BOUNCE_BUFFER to force BB to be compiled into SPL or something ... Not compiling bouncebuf.c for SPL would solve this too. I have no idea what build system contortions would be required to do this though. Do you think the build system should be fixed first rather than taking this series/patch? I guess we shouldn't need a separate CONFIG_SPL_BOUNCE_BUFFER option though; we should rather simply set CONFIG_SPL_BOUNCE_BUFFER appropriately for SPL and non-SPL, and have everything key off that one variable, right? How will you be able to configure it separately for spl and non-spl ? For example, include/configs/trimslice.h contains: /* SD/MMC */ #define CONFIG_MMC #define CONFIG_GENERIC_MMC #define CONFIG_TEGRA_MMC #define CONFIG_CMD_MMC However, we don't use MMC in our SPL, but don't want to pollute every Tegra board file with ifdefs for SPL, so include/configs/tegra-common-post.h (which is included at the end of trimslice.h) contains: #ifdef CONFIG_SPL_BUILD ... /* remove MMC support */ #ifdef CONFIG_MMC #undef CONFIG_MMC #endif #ifdef CONFIG_GENERIC_MMC #undef CONFIG_GENERIC_MMC #endif #ifdef CONFIG_TEGRA_MMC #undef CONFIG_TEGRA_MMC #endif #ifdef CONFIG_CMD_MMC #undef CONFIG_CMD_MMC #endif ... #endif And in the V1 patch I proposed to tegra-common-post.h, I added the following at the end: #ifdef CONFIG_TEGRA_MMC #define CONFIG_BOUNCE_BUFFER #endif Yet, this doesn't solve the problem with SPL ... since for SPL, you'd have to do ifdef CONFIG_SPL, no? Sorry, what problem with the SPL is this not solving? I think I was tired when replying (sorry, the conference is really heavy on me). I though you wanted to disable BB only for SPL, but now I see BB being enabled depends on tegra mmc. btw. shouldn't --gc-sections remove BB code if it's not used at all? Yes, I assume so. In v2 of the patch series I have simply enabled CONFIG_BOUNCE_BUFFER unconditionally on Tegra, which removes the need for any SPL-specific changes. Before enabling it: Configuring for trimslice board... textdata bss dec hex filename 2456259304 274968 529897 815e9 ./u-boot 14451 208 72 14731398b ./spl/u-boot-spl After enabling it: Configuring for trimslice board... textdata bss dec hex filename 2457429304 274964 530010 8165a ./u-boot 14451 208 72 14731398b ./spl/u-boot-spl SPL didn't change since, so this seems to be working fine. ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 1/3] common: add ifdefs around bouncebuf.c body
Dear Stephen Warren, On 11/07/2012 06:21 AM, Marek Vasut wrote: Dear Stephen Warren, On 11/06/2012 03:57 PM, Marek Vasut wrote: Dear Stephen Warren, On 11/06/2012 03:43 PM, Marek Vasut wrote: Dear Stephen Warren, On 11/05/2012 05:54 PM, Marek Vasut wrote: Dear Stephen Warren, From: Stephen Warren swar...@nvidia.com If a U-Boot config file enables CONFIG_BOUNCE_BUFFER only for the main U-Boot build and not for the SPL, then config.mk will contain CONFIG_BOUNCE_BUFFER=y, so common/Makefile will build bouncebuf.c for both the SPL and main U-Boot, but config.h won't set CONFIG_BOUNCE_BUFFER for the SPL, so bouncebuf.h will provide static inline functions, which will conflict with the compiled bouncebuf.c. Solve this by guarding the body of bouncebuf.c with the ifdef to avoid conflicts. Uh, don't you want the bounce buffer not compiled in for SPL? Then maybe add CONFIG_SPL_BOUNCE_BUFFER to force BB to be compiled into SPL or something ... Not compiling bouncebuf.c for SPL would solve this too. I have no idea what build system contortions would be required to do this though. Do you think the build system should be fixed first rather than taking this series/patch? I guess we shouldn't need a separate CONFIG_SPL_BOUNCE_BUFFER option though; we should rather simply set CONFIG_SPL_BOUNCE_BUFFER appropriately for SPL and non-SPL, and have everything key off that one variable, right? How will you be able to configure it separately for spl and non-spl ? For example, include/configs/trimslice.h contains: /* SD/MMC */ #define CONFIG_MMC #define CONFIG_GENERIC_MMC #define CONFIG_TEGRA_MMC #define CONFIG_CMD_MMC However, we don't use MMC in our SPL, but don't want to pollute every Tegra board file with ifdefs for SPL, so include/configs/tegra-common-post.h (which is included at the end of trimslice.h) contains: #ifdef CONFIG_SPL_BUILD ... /* remove MMC support */ #ifdef CONFIG_MMC #undef CONFIG_MMC #endif #ifdef CONFIG_GENERIC_MMC #undef CONFIG_GENERIC_MMC #endif #ifdef CONFIG_TEGRA_MMC #undef CONFIG_TEGRA_MMC #endif #ifdef CONFIG_CMD_MMC #undef CONFIG_CMD_MMC #endif ... #endif And in the V1 patch I proposed to tegra-common-post.h, I added the following at the end: #ifdef CONFIG_TEGRA_MMC #define CONFIG_BOUNCE_BUFFER #endif Yet, this doesn't solve the problem with SPL ... since for SPL, you'd have to do ifdef CONFIG_SPL, no? Sorry, what problem with the SPL is this not solving? I think I was tired when replying (sorry, the conference is really heavy on me). I though you wanted to disable BB only for SPL, but now I see BB being enabled depends on tegra mmc. btw. shouldn't --gc-sections remove BB code if it's not used at all? Yes, I assume so. In v2 of the patch series I have simply enabled CONFIG_BOUNCE_BUFFER unconditionally on Tegra, which removes the need for any SPL-specific changes. Before enabling it: Configuring for trimslice board... text data bss dec hex filename 245625 9304 274968 529897 815e9 ./u-boot 14451 208 72 14731398b ./spl/u-boot-spl After enabling it: Configuring for trimslice board... text data bss dec hex filename 245742 9304 274964 530010 8165a ./u-boot 14451 208 72 14731398b ./spl/u-boot-spl SPL didn't change since, so this seems to be working fine. Good! ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 1/3] common: add ifdefs around bouncebuf.c body
On 11/05/2012 04:47 PM, Simon Glass wrote: Hi Stephen, On Mon, Nov 5, 2012 at 3:04 PM, Stephen Warren swar...@wwwdotorg.org wrote: From: Stephen Warren swar...@nvidia.com If a U-Boot config file enables CONFIG_BOUNCE_BUFFER only for the main U-Boot build and not for the SPL, then config.mk will contain CONFIG_BOUNCE_BUFFER=y, so common/Makefile will build bouncebuf.c for both the SPL and main U-Boot, but config.h won't set CONFIG_BOUNCE_BUFFER for the SPL, so bouncebuf.h will provide static inline functions, which will conflict with the compiled bouncebuf.c. Solve this by guarding the body of bouncebuf.c with the ifdef to avoid conflicts. Signed-off-by: Stephen Warren swar...@nvidia.com Acked-by: Simon Glass s...@chromium.org This seems like a problem that might come up in other areas. I wonder if SPL should have its own autoconf.mk? That might be a good idea. Is the config.h separate for SPL-vs-non-SPL? Perhaps it doesn't need to be because it's simply always evaluated at each individual compile time, whereas perhaps autoconf.mk is generated once rather than evaluated? As you can tell, I have not looked into this or most aspects of U-Boot's build system, so I have no idea how feasible fixing the build system for this would be. ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 1/3] common: add ifdefs around bouncebuf.c body
On 11/05/2012 05:54 PM, Marek Vasut wrote: Dear Stephen Warren, From: Stephen Warren swar...@nvidia.com If a U-Boot config file enables CONFIG_BOUNCE_BUFFER only for the main U-Boot build and not for the SPL, then config.mk will contain CONFIG_BOUNCE_BUFFER=y, so common/Makefile will build bouncebuf.c for both the SPL and main U-Boot, but config.h won't set CONFIG_BOUNCE_BUFFER for the SPL, so bouncebuf.h will provide static inline functions, which will conflict with the compiled bouncebuf.c. Solve this by guarding the body of bouncebuf.c with the ifdef to avoid conflicts. Uh, don't you want the bounce buffer not compiled in for SPL? Then maybe add CONFIG_SPL_BOUNCE_BUFFER to force BB to be compiled into SPL or something ... Not compiling bouncebuf.c for SPL would solve this too. I have no idea what build system contortions would be required to do this though. Do you think the build system should be fixed first rather than taking this series/patch? I guess we shouldn't need a separate CONFIG_SPL_BOUNCE_BUFFER option though; we should rather simply set CONFIG_SPL_BOUNCE_BUFFER appropriately for SPL and non-SPL, and have everything key off that one variable, right? ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 1/3] common: add ifdefs around bouncebuf.c body
Dear Stephen Warren, On 11/05/2012 05:54 PM, Marek Vasut wrote: Dear Stephen Warren, From: Stephen Warren swar...@nvidia.com If a U-Boot config file enables CONFIG_BOUNCE_BUFFER only for the main U-Boot build and not for the SPL, then config.mk will contain CONFIG_BOUNCE_BUFFER=y, so common/Makefile will build bouncebuf.c for both the SPL and main U-Boot, but config.h won't set CONFIG_BOUNCE_BUFFER for the SPL, so bouncebuf.h will provide static inline functions, which will conflict with the compiled bouncebuf.c. Solve this by guarding the body of bouncebuf.c with the ifdef to avoid conflicts. Uh, don't you want the bounce buffer not compiled in for SPL? Then maybe add CONFIG_SPL_BOUNCE_BUFFER to force BB to be compiled into SPL or something ... Not compiling bouncebuf.c for SPL would solve this too. I have no idea what build system contortions would be required to do this though. Do you think the build system should be fixed first rather than taking this series/patch? I guess we shouldn't need a separate CONFIG_SPL_BOUNCE_BUFFER option though; we should rather simply set CONFIG_SPL_BOUNCE_BUFFER appropriately for SPL and non-SPL, and have everything key off that one variable, right? How will you be able to configure it separately for spl and non-spl ? Best regards, Marek Vasut ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 1/3] common: add ifdefs around bouncebuf.c body
On 11/06/2012 03:43 PM, Marek Vasut wrote: Dear Stephen Warren, On 11/05/2012 05:54 PM, Marek Vasut wrote: Dear Stephen Warren, From: Stephen Warren swar...@nvidia.com If a U-Boot config file enables CONFIG_BOUNCE_BUFFER only for the main U-Boot build and not for the SPL, then config.mk will contain CONFIG_BOUNCE_BUFFER=y, so common/Makefile will build bouncebuf.c for both the SPL and main U-Boot, but config.h won't set CONFIG_BOUNCE_BUFFER for the SPL, so bouncebuf.h will provide static inline functions, which will conflict with the compiled bouncebuf.c. Solve this by guarding the body of bouncebuf.c with the ifdef to avoid conflicts. Uh, don't you want the bounce buffer not compiled in for SPL? Then maybe add CONFIG_SPL_BOUNCE_BUFFER to force BB to be compiled into SPL or something ... Not compiling bouncebuf.c for SPL would solve this too. I have no idea what build system contortions would be required to do this though. Do you think the build system should be fixed first rather than taking this series/patch? I guess we shouldn't need a separate CONFIG_SPL_BOUNCE_BUFFER option though; we should rather simply set CONFIG_SPL_BOUNCE_BUFFER appropriately for SPL and non-SPL, and have everything key off that one variable, right? How will you be able to configure it separately for spl and non-spl ? For example, include/configs/trimslice.h contains: /* SD/MMC */ #define CONFIG_MMC #define CONFIG_GENERIC_MMC #define CONFIG_TEGRA_MMC #define CONFIG_CMD_MMC However, we don't use MMC in our SPL, but don't want to pollute every Tegra board file with ifdefs for SPL, so include/configs/tegra-common-post.h (which is included at the end of trimslice.h) contains: #ifdef CONFIG_SPL_BUILD ... /* remove MMC support */ #ifdef CONFIG_MMC #undef CONFIG_MMC #endif #ifdef CONFIG_GENERIC_MMC #undef CONFIG_GENERIC_MMC #endif #ifdef CONFIG_TEGRA_MMC #undef CONFIG_TEGRA_MMC #endif #ifdef CONFIG_CMD_MMC #undef CONFIG_CMD_MMC #endif ... #endif And in the V1 patch I proposed to tegra-common-post.h, I added the following at the end: #ifdef CONFIG_TEGRA_MMC #define CONFIG_BOUNCE_BUFFER #endif ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 1/3] common: add ifdefs around bouncebuf.c body
Dear Stephen Warren, On 11/06/2012 03:43 PM, Marek Vasut wrote: Dear Stephen Warren, On 11/05/2012 05:54 PM, Marek Vasut wrote: Dear Stephen Warren, From: Stephen Warren swar...@nvidia.com If a U-Boot config file enables CONFIG_BOUNCE_BUFFER only for the main U-Boot build and not for the SPL, then config.mk will contain CONFIG_BOUNCE_BUFFER=y, so common/Makefile will build bouncebuf.c for both the SPL and main U-Boot, but config.h won't set CONFIG_BOUNCE_BUFFER for the SPL, so bouncebuf.h will provide static inline functions, which will conflict with the compiled bouncebuf.c. Solve this by guarding the body of bouncebuf.c with the ifdef to avoid conflicts. Uh, don't you want the bounce buffer not compiled in for SPL? Then maybe add CONFIG_SPL_BOUNCE_BUFFER to force BB to be compiled into SPL or something ... Not compiling bouncebuf.c for SPL would solve this too. I have no idea what build system contortions would be required to do this though. Do you think the build system should be fixed first rather than taking this series/patch? I guess we shouldn't need a separate CONFIG_SPL_BOUNCE_BUFFER option though; we should rather simply set CONFIG_SPL_BOUNCE_BUFFER appropriately for SPL and non-SPL, and have everything key off that one variable, right? How will you be able to configure it separately for spl and non-spl ? For example, include/configs/trimslice.h contains: /* SD/MMC */ #define CONFIG_MMC #define CONFIG_GENERIC_MMC #define CONFIG_TEGRA_MMC #define CONFIG_CMD_MMC However, we don't use MMC in our SPL, but don't want to pollute every Tegra board file with ifdefs for SPL, so include/configs/tegra-common-post.h (which is included at the end of trimslice.h) contains: #ifdef CONFIG_SPL_BUILD ... /* remove MMC support */ #ifdef CONFIG_MMC #undef CONFIG_MMC #endif #ifdef CONFIG_GENERIC_MMC #undef CONFIG_GENERIC_MMC #endif #ifdef CONFIG_TEGRA_MMC #undef CONFIG_TEGRA_MMC #endif #ifdef CONFIG_CMD_MMC #undef CONFIG_CMD_MMC #endif ... #endif And in the V1 patch I proposed to tegra-common-post.h, I added the following at the end: #ifdef CONFIG_TEGRA_MMC #define CONFIG_BOUNCE_BUFFER #endif Yet, this doesn't solve the problem with SPL ... since for SPL, you'd have to do ifdef CONFIG_SPL, no? Best regards, Marek Vasut ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 1/3] common: add ifdefs around bouncebuf.c body
On 11/06/2012 03:57 PM, Marek Vasut wrote: Dear Stephen Warren, On 11/06/2012 03:43 PM, Marek Vasut wrote: Dear Stephen Warren, On 11/05/2012 05:54 PM, Marek Vasut wrote: Dear Stephen Warren, From: Stephen Warren swar...@nvidia.com If a U-Boot config file enables CONFIG_BOUNCE_BUFFER only for the main U-Boot build and not for the SPL, then config.mk will contain CONFIG_BOUNCE_BUFFER=y, so common/Makefile will build bouncebuf.c for both the SPL and main U-Boot, but config.h won't set CONFIG_BOUNCE_BUFFER for the SPL, so bouncebuf.h will provide static inline functions, which will conflict with the compiled bouncebuf.c. Solve this by guarding the body of bouncebuf.c with the ifdef to avoid conflicts. Uh, don't you want the bounce buffer not compiled in for SPL? Then maybe add CONFIG_SPL_BOUNCE_BUFFER to force BB to be compiled into SPL or something ... Not compiling bouncebuf.c for SPL would solve this too. I have no idea what build system contortions would be required to do this though. Do you think the build system should be fixed first rather than taking this series/patch? I guess we shouldn't need a separate CONFIG_SPL_BOUNCE_BUFFER option though; we should rather simply set CONFIG_SPL_BOUNCE_BUFFER appropriately for SPL and non-SPL, and have everything key off that one variable, right? How will you be able to configure it separately for spl and non-spl ? For example, include/configs/trimslice.h contains: /* SD/MMC */ #define CONFIG_MMC #define CONFIG_GENERIC_MMC #define CONFIG_TEGRA_MMC #define CONFIG_CMD_MMC However, we don't use MMC in our SPL, but don't want to pollute every Tegra board file with ifdefs for SPL, so include/configs/tegra-common-post.h (which is included at the end of trimslice.h) contains: #ifdef CONFIG_SPL_BUILD ... /* remove MMC support */ #ifdef CONFIG_MMC #undef CONFIG_MMC #endif #ifdef CONFIG_GENERIC_MMC #undef CONFIG_GENERIC_MMC #endif #ifdef CONFIG_TEGRA_MMC #undef CONFIG_TEGRA_MMC #endif #ifdef CONFIG_CMD_MMC #undef CONFIG_CMD_MMC #endif ... #endif And in the V1 patch I proposed to tegra-common-post.h, I added the following at the end: #ifdef CONFIG_TEGRA_MMC #define CONFIG_BOUNCE_BUFFER #endif Yet, this doesn't solve the problem with SPL ... since for SPL, you'd have to do ifdef CONFIG_SPL, no? Sorry, what problem with the SPL is this not solving? ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 1/3] common: add ifdefs around bouncebuf.c body
Hi Stephen,
On Mon, Nov 5, 2012 at 3:04 PM, Stephen Warren swar...@wwwdotorg.org wrote:
From: Stephen Warren swar...@nvidia.com
If a U-Boot config file enables CONFIG_BOUNCE_BUFFER only for the main
U-Boot build and not for the SPL, then config.mk will contain
CONFIG_BOUNCE_BUFFER=y, so common/Makefile will build bouncebuf.c for
both the SPL and main U-Boot, but config.h won't set CONFIG_BOUNCE_BUFFER
for the SPL, so bouncebuf.h will provide static inline functions, which
will conflict with the compiled bouncebuf.c. Solve this by guarding the
body of bouncebuf.c with the ifdef to avoid conflicts.
Signed-off-by: Stephen Warren swar...@nvidia.com
Acked-by: Simon Glass s...@chromium.org
This seems like a problem that might come up in other areas. I wonder
if SPL should have its own autoconf.mk?
---
This series is based on u-boot/master. I've CC'd the MMC and Tegra
maintainers since they'll presumably need to ack the changes in order for
these patches to all be applied in one place. Marek seems to be the main
MXS MMC maintainer as far as I can tell.
common/bouncebuf.c |2 ++
1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
diff --git a/common/bouncebuf.c b/common/bouncebuf.c
index 4f827f8..ffd3c90 100644
--- a/common/bouncebuf.c
+++ b/common/bouncebuf.c
@@ -27,6 +27,7 @@
#include errno.h
#include bouncebuf.h
+#ifdef CONFIG_BOUNCE_BUFFER
static int addr_aligned(void *data, size_t len)
{
const ulong align_mask = ARCH_DMA_MINALIGN - 1;
@@ -90,3 +91,4 @@ int bounce_buffer_stop(void **data, size_t len, void
**backup, uint8_t flags)
return 0;
}
+#endif
--
1.7.0.4
Regards,
Simon
___
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 1/3] common: add ifdefs around bouncebuf.c body
Dear Stephen Warren,
From: Stephen Warren swar...@nvidia.com
If a U-Boot config file enables CONFIG_BOUNCE_BUFFER only for the main
U-Boot build and not for the SPL, then config.mk will contain
CONFIG_BOUNCE_BUFFER=y, so common/Makefile will build bouncebuf.c for
both the SPL and main U-Boot, but config.h won't set CONFIG_BOUNCE_BUFFER
for the SPL, so bouncebuf.h will provide static inline functions, which
will conflict with the compiled bouncebuf.c. Solve this by guarding the
body of bouncebuf.c with the ifdef to avoid conflicts.
Uh, don't you want the bounce buffer not compiled in for SPL? Then maybe add
CONFIG_SPL_BOUNCE_BUFFER to force BB to be compiled into SPL or something ...
Signed-off-by: Stephen Warren swar...@nvidia.com
---
This series is based on u-boot/master. I've CC'd the MMC and Tegra
maintainers since they'll presumably need to ack the changes in order for
these patches to all be applied in one place. Marek seems to be the main
MXS MMC maintainer as far as I can tell.
What did I get myself into ... ;-)
common/bouncebuf.c |2 ++
1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
diff --git a/common/bouncebuf.c b/common/bouncebuf.c
index 4f827f8..ffd3c90 100644
--- a/common/bouncebuf.c
+++ b/common/bouncebuf.c
@@ -27,6 +27,7 @@
#include errno.h
#include bouncebuf.h
+#ifdef CONFIG_BOUNCE_BUFFER
static int addr_aligned(void *data, size_t len)
{
const ulong align_mask = ARCH_DMA_MINALIGN - 1;
@@ -90,3 +91,4 @@ int bounce_buffer_stop(void **data, size_t len, void
**backup, uint8_t flags)
return 0;
}
+#endif
Best regards,
Marek Vasut
___
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
