[U-Boot] [PATCH v2 06/22] Add generic spl infrastructure

[Wolfgang Denk]

Dear Aneesh V,

In message <4DD11D1F.8020006 at ti.com> you wrote:
> 
> > - Get rid of xloader. I cannot see any good reasons why we need it,
> >    i. e. which functions if performs that cannot be as well (and
> >    eventually even more efficiently) be performed in the U-Boot SPL
> >    code.
> 
> Indeed, SPL is seen as a replacement for x-loader.

Excellent.

> How do we handle the differences you just mentioned, namely the size,
> parameter passing etc. Maybe, we should have special handling for each
> and define config flags like CONFIG_SPL_PAYLOAD_UBOOT,
> CONFIG_SPL_PAYLOAD_LINUX_KERNEL etc?

None of this.  Ideally, the code should not even see such a difference.
U-Boot does not need any special arguments for booting, so we calways
pass Linux-compatible args.  And things like image size should be read
from the image itself, or form other available meta information (like
file size when reading from a FAT file system, etc.).

> >>   Makefile                           |   24 ++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >>   arch/arm/include/asm/global_data.h |    5 +++++
> >>   2 files changed, 29 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> >
> > Here the commit message and the implementation do not agree.  You
> > wrote "Create a top level directory 'spl'" - but I don't see any of
> > that here?
> 
> In this patch, I just created the makefile infrastructure that expects
> this directory structure. The files are created later in an OMAP
> specific patch.

Such a definition should include the rename / moving of the other,
already existing code.


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
Computers are not intelligent. They only think they are.