[U-Boot] [PATCH] arm, davinci: make arch_cpu_init() in da850_lowlevel.c weak

[Heiko Schocher]

Hello Wolfgang, Christian,

Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear Christian Riesch,
> 
> In message <1320830586-19124-1-git-send-email-christian.riesch at omicron.at> you wrote:
>> This patch allows replacing arch_cpu_init() if a custom initialization
>> is required.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Christian Riesch <christian.riesch at omicron.at>
>> Cc: Sandeep Paulraj <s-paulraj at ti.com>
>> Cc: Heiko Schocher <hs at denx.de>
>> ---
>>  arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/da850_lowlevel.c |    1 +
>>  1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/da850_lowlevel.c b/arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/da850_lowlevel.c
>> index 327ff97..fe142dc 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/da850_lowlevel.c
>> +++ b/arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/davinci/da850_lowlevel.c
>> @@ -263,6 +263,7 @@ void nand_boot(void)
>>  #if defined(CONFIG_NAND_SPL)
>>  void board_init_f(ulong bootflag)
>>  #else
>> +__attribute__ ((weak))
>>  int arch_cpu_init(void)
>>  #endif
> 
> Stop please.
> 
> This whole code is crap and needs to be changed.
[...]
> Heiko, Christian: please negotiate who performs which part of the
> cleanup. But I expect that with proper symbolic names instead of the
> hardwired constants the need for a wek function will go away.

I rework this.

> Albert, please make sure to block this current code. I do not want to
> see this in mainline as is.

Is it OK, if I send a cleanup patch against current u-boot-arm.git?

bye,
Heiko
-- 
DENX Software Engineering GmbH,     MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany