[U-Boot] SPL framework re-design

[Simon Schwarz]

Hi,

> You mentioned that /spl can not be used for source files. Isn't there a
> way to workaround this problem?
Why should we have source files in a SPL directory? I would prefer to
have spl specific sources right where the rest ist - maybe marked with
something like _spl or excluded by some #define-test. If we have a SPL
specific directory we have to copy most of the tree (arch/cpu etc.)
which in my eyes is totally unnecessary if we don't do the symlinking
stuff...

> Also, I agree with Scott's opinion that re-compiling some files while
> re-using the binary of some other files won't be a good idea. In this
> case, CONFIG_PRELOADER will be honored in some files but not in other
> files. That will be a source of confusion for developers.
I also see this as the biggest problem with reusing the object-files.
It will add more complexity than a simple re-run with different flags
like suggested by Daniel.

> BTW, John Rigby had sent out a series sometime back for OMAP3 NAND SPL.
> That can be integrated with my work and we will get an SPL that
> supports both MMC and NAND. I guess Simon Schwarz is also doing some
> work lately on OMAP3.
I am working on OMAP3 (on devkit8000). If this discussion comes to a
conclusion soon I would prefer sending the patches with the new SPL
format.

Regards
Simon