[U-Boot-Users] [PATCH] SPI relocation fix
wd at denx.de
Mon Apr 3 23:36:03 CEST 2006
in message <44318AB9.2070209 at paulidav.org> you wrote:
> No problem. I can easily #ifdef the call to UcodeCopy rather than the
> body itself, since it's predicated on the need for the patch. But
> cpm_load_patch() should still has to be called unconditionally and if no
Ummm... why would I want to call this function if I don't need it?
> relocation is required at all, it will be empty. This is a small price
> to pay for the ability to handle different cases automatically without
> the need to worry about whether a microcode patch is actually needed
> (because depending on the CPU and actual settings there might be no
> relocation or relocation with or without a patch).
Ummm... The function name "CPM load patch" suggests that it is used
to load a microcode patch.
> I believe that we need some centralized code, because certain
> combination of patches/devices do affect other devices (that's the
> nature of microcode patches provided my Motorola) that might not really
> be used by a certain board, but still have to be programmed correctly.
> For example, the combined I2C/SPI/SMC relocation patch requires correct
> rpbase settings on both SMC1 and SMC2 regardless of whether you plan to
> use them or not.
> Unfortunately, all these dependancies are a little difficult to express
> via C preprocessor (at least not without making the configuration much
> more complex and error prone). You can see that the code in
> mpc8xx_upatch.h got pretty complex on its own.
Then let's at least rename the function to have a name that says what
it's supposed to do.
Software Engineering: Embedded and Realtime Systems, Embedded Linux
Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: wd at denx.de
The universe is all a spin-off of the Big Bang.
More information about the U-Boot