From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Philipp Tomsich <philipp.tomsich@theobroma-systems.com>
Date: Tue, 07 Nov 2017 15:18:47 +0100
Subject: [U-Boot] [U-Boot, v5,
	12/18] arm: mark save_boot_params_ret as a function
In-Reply-To: <1507645279-25188-13-git-send-email-philipp.tomsich@theobroma-systems.com>
References: <1507645279-25188-13-git-send-email-philipp.tomsich@theobroma-systems.com>
Message-ID: <E1eC4iF-0001Pv-BC@mail.theobroma-systems.com>
List-Id: <u-boot.lists.denx.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: u-boot@lists.denx.de

> As no '.type' was set for save_boot_params_ret in start.S, binutils
> did not track whether it was emitted as A32 or T32.  By properly
> marking save_boot_params_ret as a potential function entry, we can
> make sure that the compiler will insert the appropriate instructions
> for branching to save_boot_params_ret both for call-sites emitted as
> A32 and T32.
> 
> Reported-by: Andy Yan <andy.yan@rock-chips.com>
> Signed-off-by: Philipp Tomsich <philipp.tomsich@theobroma-systems.com>
> Tested-by: Andy Yan <andy.yan@rock-chips.com>
> ---
> 
> Changes in v5: None
> Changes in v4: None
> Changes in v3:
> - tracked the root-cause why no interwork branch was emitted and fixed
>   it using a '.type'-directive in start.S to mark save_boot_params_ret
>   as a (possible) function-entry.
> 
> Changes in v2: None
> 
>  arch/arm/cpu/armv7/start.S | 1 +
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> 

Applied to u-boot-rockchip/next, thanks!