[U-Boot] [PATCH 4/4] powerpc: Add LINK_OFF calls in early C-code.

[Joakim Tjernlund]

Scott Wood <scottwood at freescale.com> wrote on 2011/01/10 19:24:02:
>
> On Sun, 9 Jan 2011 21:48:47 +0100
> Joakim Tjernlund <joakim.tjernlund at transmode.se> wrote:
>
> > Wolfgang Denk <wd at denx.de> wrote on 2011/01/09 21:29:04:
> > >
> > > Dear Joakim Tjernlund,
> > >
> > > In message <1292838435-14958-4-git-send-email-Joakim.Tjernlund at transmode.se> you wrote:
> > > > Only these 2 call sites depends on fixups for my mpc8321 based
> > > > board.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Joakim Tjernlund <Joakim.Tjernlund at transmode.se>
> > > > ---
> > > >  arch/powerpc/cpu/mpc83xx/cpu_init.c |    2 +-
> > > >  arch/powerpc/lib/board.c            |    2 +-
> > > >  2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/arch/powerpc/cpu/mpc83xx/cpu_init.c b/arch/powerpc/cpu/mpc83xx/cpu_init.c
> > > > index 7a1cae7..88d9dd8 100644
> > > > --- a/arch/powerpc/cpu/mpc83xx/cpu_init.c
> > > > +++ b/arch/powerpc/cpu/mpc83xx/cpu_init.c
> > > > @@ -507,7 +507,7 @@ int prt_83xx_rsr(void)
> > > >     sep = " ";
> > > >     for (i = 0; i < n; i++)
> > > >        if (rsr & bits[i].mask) {
> > > > -         printf("%s%s", sep, bits[i].desc);
> > > > +         printf("%s%s", sep, LINK_OFF(bits[i].desc));
> > > >           sep = ", ";
> > > >        }
> > >
> > >
> > > Is my understanding correct that these changes are sufficient only for
> > > your board, and only for your current configuration?  And that your
> > > code would break (resp. require more LINK_OFF fixups) if you would -
> > > for example - decide to enable CONFIG_DISPLAY_AER_FULL in your board
> > > configuration (cf. print_83xx_arb_event() above in the same source
> > > file) ?
> >
> > It would break only if link address != load address. That is, if you
> > want to use my new CONFIG_SYS_TRUE_PIC feature and be able to load
> > u-boot at any address regardless of link address you would
> > have to add LINK_OFF calls into print_83xx_arb_event() too if
> > you want to use it.
>
> Doesn't this add a requirement for future generic pre-relocation code to
> comply with, to avoid breaking your board?

Yes, but I don't mind if my board breaks from time to time. After all it isn't
in u-boot so I have had to deal with quite a few breakages already.
It is my hope this new feature will spread to other boards as time
pass.

 Jocke