[U-Boot] [PATCH v3] Consolidate bootcount code into drivers/bootcount

[Stefan Roese]

Hi Andreas,

On 08/13/2012 03:48 PM, Andreas Bießmann wrote:
>>>> +COBJS-y				+= bootcount.o
>>>> +COBJS-$(CONFIG_AT91SAM9XE)	+= bootcount_at91.o
>>>
>>> I tend to NAK this. Before it was available to all at91 processors (keep
>>> in mind nearly all at91 have this gpbr register). Now it is only
>>> available to AT91SAM9XE processor series which is the only user for
>>> bootcount in mainline.
>>
>> Then we should choose a different CONFIG_ option here. One that selects
>> all AT91 boards potentially supporting this feature. You are the expert
>> here, please make a suggestion.
> 
> Unfortunately there is no such config option yet. We could add all the
> SoC explicitly like this:
> 
> ---8<---
> | +COBJS-$(CONFIG_AT91SAM9260)    += bootcount_at91.o
> | +COBJS-$(CONFIG_AT91SAM9261)    += bootcount_at91.o
> | +COBJS-$(CONFIG_AT91SAM9263)    += bootcount_at91.o
> | +COBJS-$(CONFIG_AT91SAM9G10)    += bootcount_at91.o
> | +COBJS-$(CONFIG_AT91SAM9G20)    += bootcount_at91.o
> | +COBJS-$(CONFIG_AT91SAM9M10G45) += bootcount_at91.o
> | +COBJS-$(CONFIG_AT91SAM9RL)     += bootcount_at91.o
> |  COBJS-$(CONFIG_AT91SAM9XE)     += bootcount_at91.o
> | +COBJS-$(CONFIG_AT91SAM9G20)    += bootcount_at91.o
> --->8---
> 
> Maybe there is some make foo to get this easier?

Maybe. But nothing I can think of quickly. The better solution would be
to add a new common CONFIG_AT91 (or similar) define, which is defined
for all at91 platforms. Might be helpful in other places as well.

Not sure, how to best add this global AT91 define though. Easy wold be
to add it to config header files.

>>> I fear we may break some not mainline boards
>>> here.
>>
>> Maybe. But we usually don't care about out-of-tree ports.
> 
> That is true, we could just wait for patches adding this feature to
> other at91 SoC.
> 
>>> I would prefer something that includes all different at91 SoC by
>>> default (except rm9200).
>>>
>>> I have no solution yet but send this to prevent a v4. Will send a
>>> proposal for at91 later this day.
>>
>> Okay. But I would really like to see this patch go in soon. I still have
>> a new board support patch waiting here for quite a long time depending
>> on this bootcount stuff.
> 
> I'm with you, do you have a suggestion how to do the make foo nice?

See above. Perhaps somebody else has other suggestions.

Nevertheless I think we can postpone this "AT91 bootcount tuning" to a
follow-up patch.

Best regards,
Stefan

--
DENX Software Engineering GmbH,      MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel
HRB 165235 Munich,  Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-0 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: office at denx.de