[U-Boot] [PATCH v2 1/3] spl: add RAM boot device only if it is actually defined

[Simon Glass]

Hi Stefan,

On 14 November 2016 at 15:44, Stefan Agner <stefan at agner.ch> wrote:
> On 2016-11-14 12:44, Simon Glass wrote:
>> Hi Stefan,
>>
>> On 12 November 2016 at 12:13, Stefan Agner <stefan at agner.ch> wrote:
>>> From: Stefan Agner <stefan.agner at toradex.com>
>>>
>>> Some devices (e.g. dra7xx) support loading to RAM using DFU without
>>> having direct boot from RAM support. Make sure the linker list
>>> does not contain BOOT_DEVICE_RAM if CONFIG_SPL_RAM_SUPPORT is not
>>> enabled.
>>>
>>> Fixes: 98136b2f26fa ("spl: Convert spl_ram_load_image() to use linker list")
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Stefan Agner <stefan.agner at toradex.com>
>>> ---
>>>
>>> Changes in v2:
>>> - Use CONFIG_SPL_RAM_SUPPORT to descide whether to compile the
>>>   function in first place.
>>>
>>>  common/spl/spl.c | 4 +++-
>>>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> Instead of this, how about moving it into its own file and putting
>> that condition in the Makefile?
>
> Generally a good idea.
>
> What I don't like to much that we have two orthogonal config options
> using that same function...
>
> We probably should have something like:
>
> CONFIG_SPL_RAM_SUPPORT
> CONFIG_SPL_RAM_ONLY_SUPPORT depends on CONFIG_SPL_RAM_SUPPORT
> CONFIG_SPL_DFU_SUPPORT depends on CONFIG_SPL_RAM_SUPPORT
>
> Then we could use a single config option (CONFIG_SPL_RAM_SUPPORT) for
> the new file.
>
> However, that is beyond bug fixing, and I'd rather prefer to have it in
> a separate patch, what do you think?

That's fine with me.

Regards,
Simon