[U-Boot-Users] Proposed change; What do you think?
dan at embeddededge.com
Thu Aug 19 20:35:38 CEST 2004
On Aug 18, 2004, at 6:08 PM, Jon Loeliger wrote:
> In particular, I'd like to propose a shift from having these
> fields be present when certain boards are #defined to having
> these fields be present when CONFIG_ETH1ADDR symbols are defined.
I prefer we don't have #defines that change the size of a bd_t.
All board descriptors should be the same size, not all boards
use all of the fields, but that's OK.
This way, we have a better chance of using common Linux
binaries when that is useful. Having different versions of
a kernel just because the bd_t is a different size doesn't
seem like a useful configuration. If you want variability
in the parameters, let's use the bi_rec interface for passing
More information about the U-Boot