On Thursday 04 March 2021 14:50:56 Stefan Roese wrote: > On 04.03.21 14:41, Pali Rohár wrote: > > On Thursday 04 March 2021 14:29:46 Stefan Roese wrote: > > > On 03.03.21 11:21, Pali Rohár wrote: > > > > Hello! > > > > > > > > I see in more U-Boot files check for ifdef CONFIG_ARMADA_39X but I do > > > > not see that CONFIG_ARMADA_39X could be defined in some header or board > > > > code. > > > > > > > > So does it mean that all code under ifdef CONFIG_ARMADA_39X is dead? Has > > > > U-Boot support for Marvell A39X SoC? > > > > > > > > If it is really dead code, should not be ifdef CONFIG_ARMADA_39X > > > > completely removed? > > > > > > Frankly, I don't remember the history here. Did you look into the git > > > history to see, where this Kconfig option was introduced? > > > > There is no Kconfig option for ARMADA_39X. > > > > Only C source files are checking if CONFIG_ARMADA_39X is defined or not. > > But there is no code which can define CONFIG_ARMADA_39X, neither header > > file nor Kconfig. > > > > That is suspicious for me. > > I agree. Thanks for looking into it. > > > > It could very well be the case, that this was introduced "by accident" > > > by including some Marvell code without taking it out. AFAIK, we are not > > > supporting any Armada 39x in mainline right now. > > > > So it looks like that somebody introduced code #ifdef CONFIG_ARMADA_39X > > on more places "by accident". > > > > For example in commit edb470253346f4a882ba9e891c8b102ce388b9cc were > > added some these ifdefs and commit was authorized by you. So I thought > > that you would know more... > > Autsch. That was in 2015 - sorry my memory does not cover history > that long (anymore). ;)
Ok :) > > So if mainline U-Boot does not support Armada 39x, does it make sense to > > remove all code hidden under CONFIG_ARMADA_39X? Following command could > > do it: > > > > git ls-tree -r --name-only HEAD | xargs unifdef -m -UCONFIG_ARMADA_39X > > I agree in general. But would it make syncing with Marvell original > code more difficult? I was synchronizing only ddr3 training code for a38x. And during synchronization I already called unifdef with tons of undef options. So adding another one does not make it more difficult. And about synchronizing other parts of code I have no idea if it happened...
