Hello Stefano, I'm CCing Wolfgang,
> Hi Marek, > > On 15/06/2013 23:41, Marek Vasut wrote: > > Using 1024 bytes for console buffer is unnecessarily too much, > > lower the amount for all MXS boards to 256. > > > > Signed-off-by: Marek Vasut <[email protected]> > > Cc: Fabio Estevam <[email protected]> > > Cc: Lauri Hintsala <[email protected]> > > Cc: Otavio Salvador <[email protected]> > > Cc: Stefano Babic <[email protected]> > > --- > > > > include/configs/mxs.h | 2 +- > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > Note: This depends on http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/251631/ > > > > diff --git a/include/configs/mxs.h b/include/configs/mxs.h > > index a684166..161d89d 100644 > > --- a/include/configs/mxs.h > > +++ b/include/configs/mxs.h > > @@ -92,7 +92,7 @@ > > > > #ifndef CONFIG_SYS_PROMPT > > #define CONFIG_SYS_PROMPT "=> " > > #endif > > > > -#define CONFIG_SYS_CBSIZE 1024 /* Console I/O buffer size */ > > +#define CONFIG_SYS_CBSIZE 256 /* Console I/O buffer size */ > > > > #define CONFIG_SYS_PBSIZE \ > > > > (CONFIG_SYS_CBSIZE + sizeof(CONFIG_SYS_PROMPT) + 16) > > > > /* Print buffer size */ > > I am missing something: which is the real advantage to reduce the > console buffer ? I do not think that the saved memory is worth, and on > the other side more elaborated scripts (usings nested if-then-else) are > quite long nowadays. True, but so far they didn't overflow this limit I believe. Some of them are hanging on the verge of blowing it though, good point. Best regards, Marek Vasut _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list [email protected] http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
