[U-Boot] [PATCH 1/8] POST/arm: adaptations needed for POST on ARM to work

From: Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org>
To: u-boot@lists.denx.de
Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH 1/8] POST/arm: adaptations needed for POST on ARM to work
Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2011 13:42:08 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <201108181342.09672.vapier@gentoo.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <201108181901.56550.marek.vasut@gmail.com>

On Thursday, August 18, 2011 13:01:56 Marek Vasut wrote:
> On Thursday, August 18, 2011 04:31:09 PM Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > On Thursday, August 18, 2011 06:07:06 Marek Vasut wrote:
> > > On Tuesday, August 16, 2011 08:03:54 PM Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > > > On Monday, August 15, 2011 05:09:42 Valentin Longchamp wrote:
> > > > > On 08/14/2011 09:07 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > > > > > On Wednesday, August 03, 2011 08:37:00 Valentin Longchamp wrote:
> > > > > >> --- a/include/post.h
> > > > > >> +++ b/include/post.h
> > > > > >> 
> > > > > >> +/*
> > > > > >> + * some ARM implementations have to use gd->ram_size, since
> > > > > >> POST_WORD is + * defined in RAM
> > > > > >> + */
> > > > > >> +DECLARE_GLOBAL_DATA_PTR;
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > i'm not sure about this.  no other header has been allowed to do
> > > > > > this in the past, and i dont think we should start now.
> > > > > 
> > > > > OK. Then we should move the post_word_load and post_word_store
> > > > > function to post/post.c. Would this be accepted ?
> > > > 
> > > > that would add overhead that most people dont need.  i guess the only
> > > > other option would be to add a CONFIG_POST_EXTERNAL_WORD_FUNCS and
> > > > then post.h would just define the two funcs as externs.  it'd be up
> > > > to the board porters to define them however they want.
> > > 
> > > We don't want externs. Why would moving it into post.c introduce any
> > > overhead ?
> > 
> > because the current code expands into a single memory read/write for many
> > arches.  moving it into post.c already means making it into an extern and
> > now people have to call an external function instead of inlining the
> > memory access.
> 
> I don't think I follow you here ... why won't you be able to inline that
> stuff if it's in post.c ?

grep the tree.  post.c isnt the only consumer of these funcs.
-mike
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
Url : http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/attachments/20110818/0f474f10/attachment.pgp