[U-Boot-Users] CONFIG_BOOTBINFUNC for AT91RM9200

[Steven Scholz]

Wolfgang Denk wrote:

> In message <41A35C81.20709 at imc-berlin.de> you wrote:
> 
>>Then I think CONFIG_INIT_CRITICAL is the best choice!
> 
> 
> Definitely not - CONFIG_INIT_CRITICAL is such an  ugly  name  that  I
> wonder who accepted a patch to introduce such a name ;-)
> 
> There is no documentation what it does or means; there is not even  a
> definitian   what   "sys-critical   inits"   might   be   -  all  the
> initializations are "system critical". This is bullsh*i.
> 
> We should not use this name, but try to get rid of it.

Hmm. So I suggest replacing it with CONFIG_INIT_LOWLEVEL or CONFIG_LOWLEVEL_INIT.

But then: these init steps (clocks and memory) are vital for U-Boot to run. So 
why do we need this define anyway if these steps should be done always... ?

-- 
Steven Scholz