[U-Boot] [PATCH 3/8 v2] Introduce the Tertiary Program loader

[Haiying Wang]

On Mon, 2011-01-24 at 23:09 +0100, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear Haiying Wang,
> 
> In message <1295906076.2051.127.camel at haiying-laptop> you wrote:
> >
> > > What I do not understand is what the TPL_BOOT variable in the
> > > Makefile is good for.  I cannot understand the current use.
> > 
> > Well, it was used to generate the tpl image under tpl/ directory. Maybe TPL_BOOT is a bad name here, I just thought it was too simple to use TPL. 
> 
> It's not the name.  But you use it ina few places here, buth then hard
> encode "tpl" in a number of other paces there.  Which means that you
> cannot change TPL_BOOT to any other value, or building would break.
> So why do we need this variable?
It follows the same usage of NAND_SPL.

> > > > > > +$(TPL_BOOT):	$(TIMESTAMP_FILE) $(VERSION_FILE) depend
> > > > > > +		$(MAKE) -C tpl/board/$(BOARDDIR) all
> > > > > 
> > > > > Assume CONFIG_TPL_U_BOOT is not defined, then TPL_BOOT is not defined,
> > > > > and this rule will probably cause a build error, doesn't it?
> > > > No, I don't think there is a build error.
> > > 
> > > WEell, if CONFIG_TPL_U_BOOT is not 'y', then TPL_BOOT is not
> > > defined, which results in this make rule:
> > > 
> > > 	: $(TIMESTAMP_FILE) $(VERSION_FILE) depend
> > > 		$(MAKE) -C tpl/board/$(BOARDDIR) all
> > > 
> > > i. e. there would be no target name befoe the semicolon.
> > If TPL_BOOT here is not defined, the reset(after semicolon) will not be executed, just like NAND_SPL and ONENAND_IPL etc. 
> 
> Sorry, I cannot follow - which reset? which semicolon?

Sorry, :%s/reset/rest/. The semicolon is the same one in your previous
comments. I meant the part:
	: $(TIMESTAMP_FILE) $(VERSION_FILE) depend
		$(MAKE) -C tpl/board/$(BOARDDIR) all

If it is as you thought, then how the platforms will be built without
NAND_SPL or ONENAND_IPL is not defined?

Haiying