[U-Boot] [PATCH] powerpc: Fix declaration type for I/O functions

[Scott Wood]

On 08/23/2012 01:03 PM, Andy Fleming wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 12:57 PM, Scott Wood <scottwood at freescale.com> wrote:
>> On 08/23/2012 12:24 PM, Andy Fleming wrote:
>>> This patch (commit 20959471b5d07fdeb8603b918d80385aa2954711),
>>> strangely, causes the error below to happen when I build
>>> P1010RDB_36BIT_NAND:
>>>
>>> Configuring for P1010RDB_36BIT_NAND - Board: P1010RDB, Options: P1010RDB,36BIT,N
>>> AND
>>> make[1]: *** [/local/afleming/u-boot/nand_spl/u-boot-spl] Error 1
>>> make: *** [nand_spl] Error 2
>>> /opt/freescale/usr/local/gcc-4.5.55-eglibc-2.11.55/powerpc-linux-gnu/bin/powerpc
>>> -linux-gnu-size: './u-boot': No such file
>>> /opt/freescale/usr/local/gcc-4.5.55-eglibc-2.11.55/powerpc-linux-gnu/bin/powerpc
>>> -linux-gnu-ld: section .bootpg loaded at [00000000ff801000,00000000ff80120f] ove
>>> rlaps section .data loaded at [00000000ff800e90,00000000ff80102b]
>>> make[1]: *** [/local/afleming/u-boot/nand_spl/u-boot-spl] Error 1
>>> make: *** [nand_spl] Error 2
>>> make: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs....
>>>
>>> ${CROSS_COMPILE}gcc --version:
>>> powerpc-linux-gnu-gcc (Sourcery G++ Lite 2010.09-55) 4.5.1
>>>
>>> I'm guessing this change increased the amount of inlining. Sadly, the
>>> subsequent patches, which were intended to shrink the SPL build, were
>>> not enough to fix this problem.
>>>
>>> My inclination is to revert this patch until we figure out what went wrong.
>>>
>>> On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 3:49 AM, Prabhakar Kushwaha
>>> <prabhakar at freescale.com> wrote:
>>>> Prototype declaration of I/O operation functions are not correct. as both
>>>> 'extern' and function definition are at same place.
>>>>
>>>> Chage protoype declaration as static.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Prabhakar Kushwaha <prabhakar at freescale.com>
>>>
>>
>> It builds OK for me using that same toolchain.  What SHA1 are you building?
>>
>> -Scott
>
> Very top of Wolfgang's master branch.
> 

Sigh, I missed the "36bit" part.  Before reverting, let me see if I can
fix it today.

BTW, "top of ..." is not a SHA1.

-Scott