From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Alexey Brodkin Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2015 14:22:05 +0000 Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH v4] Fix board init code to use a valid C runtime environment In-Reply-To: <20151116151527.34e833e7@lilith> References: <1447611925-4028-1-git-send-email-albert.u.boot@aribaud.net> <1447679534.6240.6.camel@synopsys.com> <20151116143425.1384e63e@lilith> <1447681397.6240.16.camel@synopsys.com> <20151116151527.34e833e7@lilith> Message-ID: <1447683723.6240.29.camel@synopsys.com> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de Hi Albert, On Mon, 2015-11-16 at 15:15 +0100, Albert ARIBAUD wrote: > Hello Alexey, > > On Mon, 16 Nov 2015 13:43:19 +0000, Alexey Brodkin > wrote: > > Hi Albert, > > > > On Mon, 2015-11-16 at 14:34 +0100, Albert ARIBAUD wrote: > > > Hello Alexey, > > > > > > On Mon, 16 Nov 2015 13:12:15 +0000, Alexey Brodkin > > > wrote: > > > > Hi Albert, > > > > > > > > > > > > - /* Allocate and zero GD, update SP */ > > > > > - mov %r0, %sp > > > > > - bl board_init_f_mem > > > > > - > > > > > + /* Get reserved area size, update SP and FP */ > > > > > + bl board_init_f_get_reserve_size > > > > > /* Update stack- and frame-pointers */ > > > > > > > > I think we don't need to mention SP/FP update in comments twice here. > > > > I.e. either strip ", update SP and FP" from your introduced comment or > > > > which I really like more remove following line with comment entirely: > > > > ---------->8---------- > > > > /* Update stack- and frame-pointers */ > > > > ---------->8---------- > > > > > > Not sure where you see two SP+FP 'update' comments here; probably > > > you're referring to the 'setup' comment on line 53 and the 'update' > > > one on line 59. If that is what you meant, I tink these comments are > > > different and deserve staying both... > > > > Ok, that's what I have after your patch application: > > > > ---------->8---------- > > /* Setup stack- and frame-pointers */ > > mov %sp, CONFIG_SYS_INIT_SP_ADDR > > mov %fp, %sp > > > > /* Get reserved area size, update SP and FP */ > > bl board_init_f_get_reserve_size > > /* Update stack- and frame-pointers */ <-- that's already mentioned 2 lines above > > sub %sp, %sp, %r0 > > mov %fp, %sp > > ---------->8---------- > > My bad, I'd missed that one. I'll turn > > /* Get reserved area size, update SP and FP */ > > Into > > /* Get reserved area size */ > > > > ... However, these comments also pretty much just paraphrase the code > > > which follows them and thus serve little purpose; they could be > > > reworded to show less of what is being done and more of why it is being > > > done: > > > > > > - the "Update stack- and frame-pointer" comment could be turned into > > > "Allocate reserved size on stack and adjust frame pointer > > > accordingly", and > > > > > > - the "Setup stack- and frame-pointers" comment could be turned into > > > "Establish C runtime stack and frame". > > > > > > Opinions? > > > > Totally agree, care to implement it? > > That, and the removal of the repetition. v5 in approach. > > > -Alexey > > Amicalement, Thanks for doing that! -Alexey