[U-Boot] [RFC] [PATCH V2] arm: arm926ejs: use ELF relocations

[Wolfgang Denk]

Dear Albert ARIBAUD,

In message <4CAAFEDD.4060005 at free.fr> you wrote:
>
> As for splitting the thing into individual patches, I would like some 
> advice. Obviously a first patch could be the bugfix to the ble/blo 
> issuein existing start.S, and the last patch shall be the change to 
> edminiv2.

Correct.

> My problem is with the essential part: changing only the compile and 
> link options in arm, or changing only the start.S and u-boot.lds in 
> arm926, produces a nonworking, non-buildable, tree. So it would seem 
> that all of this should go in a single patch in order to remain bisectable.
> 
> However, changing arm without changing other cpus than arm926 would 
> break build on these, so a bisectable change would require a single 
> patch to arm and all its cpus. Seems a bit big for me.

Agreed.

Well, let's split development and testing from the final committing.

I suggest you provide what you can in  single patch, and we put this
in a separate branch of the git repository.  Heiko and me may then add
support for the precessors we used for testing, i. e. arm1136 and
armv7.  Hopefully others will pick up from there for the remaining
processors.

When committing to mainline (or to u-boot-arm) I can sqash all the
processor related commits into a single one.


Umm... is my understanding correct that we can drop the whole
CONFIG_SYS_ARM_WITHOUT_RELOC stuff then, too?

Best regards,

Wolfgang Denk

-- 
DENX Software Engineering GmbH,     MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: wd at denx.de
Every revolutionary idea - in science, politics, art, or  whatever  -
evokes three stages of reaction in a hearer:
  1. It is completely impossible - don't waste my time.
  2. It is possible, but it is not worth doing.
  3. I said it was a good idea all along.