[U-Boot] [PATCH0/6] patchset to support TPL and P1021MDS board

[Wolfgang Denk]

Dear Scott Wood,

In message <20110131151506.700ddcd7 at udp111988uds.am.freescale.net> you wrote:
> 
> > For example, why must we add the Makefile changes in the first step,
> > when all the code it references is still missing?  Should this not be
> > the last step?
> 
> If you make it the last step, then the board will exist but not be
> buildable in the previous step (unless you combine them, but you said
> that's not what you're asking for).  How is that better?  And is this
> really worth bickering about?

Yes, this is better, and this is how we always do it: add the featurs,
but not enable them unless we have all together, then add the needed
#defines and make rules to actually use the code.

> Please just say, clearly and specifically, what you want the patchset
> to look like...
> 
> > And what is the benefit of adding documentation to the README here?
> > To me it makes more sense to add this when CONFIG_HAS_TPL and
> > CONFIG_IN_TPL get used first.
> 
> Because it's not specific to 85xx or p1021mds.  The generic
> infrastructure for TPL consists of the makefile changes and
> documentation.  It seems useful to me to separate that for review, but

A dead / broken make rule and dead documentation is what the generic
infrastructure for TPL consists of?

> if you want it squashed into a board-specific patch instead, fine.
> Just tell us what you want to see.

I already did, but here we go:

First, please do not add make rules before you have code they apply
to.  After doing this, there is this rudimentary patch to the README.