Hi Wolfgang, On Thu, 22 Jul 2021 at 03:48, Wolfgang Denk <[email protected]> wrote: > > Dear Simon, > > In message > <CAPnjgZ0i0BQbP_BOESVazq=1o-2otvkoecvt0n+drjdkzgr...@mail.gmail.com> you > wrote: > > > > > But ... do we really *need* all this stuff? > > > > No... > > > > I added binary as an RFC because I have found a few cases where it is > > nice to be able to specify the bits (e.g. programming GPIOs). We could > > update 'md' to support it too. > > Yes, we could, but U-Boot size is continuously growing, even for > constant configurations, i. e. when no nmew features are > wanted/needed.
I think in fact my series reduces the size, at least for U-Boot proper, by 500+ bytes. We could be more aggressive about making even minor new features optional. > > > I added octal as an RFC since the current impl is almost never > > available (only when 0 is parted to simple_strtoul()) which seems odd. > > I can't see how this should work... > > > Well, yes. Perhaps we should just drop octal? > > Drop? AFAICT we never supported octal. Something like "md 040" will > start dumping at 0x00000040, right? There are quite a few places where simple_strtoul() is called with a base of 0. In that case, if the string starts with 0 it is interpreted as octal. Regards, Simon
