[U-Boot] [PATCH] i386 - resolve conflicting definitions of show_boot_progress

[Graeme Russ]

On Tue, Sep 16, 2008 at 4:54 AM, Wolfgang Denk <wd at denx.de> wrote:
> Dear Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD,
>
> In message <20080915140423.GA13136 at game.jcrosoft.org> you wrote:
>>
>> please take a look hear
>>
>> I've already send patch to fix X86
>>
>> 4698   F May18 To u-boot-users [PATCH 00/17] x86: Fix warning: type qualifiers ignored on function return type

>
> I don;t think that all these patches were actually applied to
> mainline?
>
> Best regards,
>
> Wolfgang Denk

Wolfgang - You are correct. Several of Jean-Christophe's patches were
applied and several were not. It looks like discussion on a few points
of contention lost momentum and the rest of the patch set seemed to
get abandoned. From what I can gather, Jean-Christophe's patches went
a long way in getting the i386 build cleaned up though.

Jean-Christophe - I had already seen your patch set, which is why I
raised the issue of taking on the changes myself (Aug 25 Building
U-Boot 1.3.4 SC520 based custom board) thinking that there was a i386
maintainer. I have not intended to offend anyone by submitting these
patches - I just wanted to get mainline U-Boot to a state where I
could use it for my new board. Please accept my applogies if I have
caused offence.

Regarding show_boot_progress, [PATCH 16/17] i386: Fix multipple
definition of __show_boot_progress was applied but unfortunately added
an unforseen side effect - The linker stopped complaining, but the
ASM version of show_boot_progress was being called from C - With %bp
in a totally random state, the result was that my board was resetting
(this had me tearing out my hair for quite some time)

Regards,

Graeme