[U-Boot] [RFC PATCH 09/17] spl/85xx: new SPL support

[Scott Wood]

On 09/24/2012 07:04:44 PM, Tom Rini wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 06:54:24PM -0500, Scott Wood wrote:
> > On 09/24/2012 06:51:40 PM, Tom Rini wrote:
> > >On Fri, Sep 21, 2012 at 07:01:19PM -0500, Scott Wood wrote:
> > >
> > >> Update CONFIG_RAMBOOT and CONFIG_NAND_SPL references to accept
> > >CONFIG_SPL
> > >> and CONFIG_SPL_BUILD, respectively.  CONFIG_NAND_SPL can be
> > >removed once
> > >> the last mpc85xx nand_spl target is gone.
> > >>
> > >> CONFIG_RAMBOOT will need to remain for other use cases, but it
> > >doesn't
> > >> seem right to overload it for meaning SPL as well as nand_spl
> > >does.  Even
> > >> if it's somewhat appropriate for the main u-boot, the SPL itself
> > >isn't
> > >> (necessarily) ramboot, and we don't have separate configs for
> > >SPL and
> > >> main u-boot.  It was also inconsistent, as other platforms such  
> as
> > >> mpc83xx didn't use CONFIG_RAMBOOT in this way.
> > >>
> > >> Signed-off-by: Scott Wood <scottwood at freescale.com>
> > >> Cc: Andy Fleming <afleming at gmail.com>
> > >[snip]
> > >> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/cpu/mpc85xx/u-boot-spl.lds
> > >b/arch/powerpc/cpu/mpc85xx/u-boot-spl.lds
> > >> new file mode 100644
> > >> index 0000000..372195d
> > >> --- /dev/null
> > >> +++ b/arch/powerpc/cpu/mpc85xx/u-boot-spl.lds
> > >> @@ -0,0 +1,81 @@
> > >[snip]
> > >> +OUTPUT_ARCH(powerpc)
> > >> +SECTIONS
> > >
> > >Can we add MEMORY declarations like (some) of the ARM linker
> > >scripts do
> > >so when we grow beyond the max size it's a link error?
> >
> > It's already a linker error, because you get an overlap with the
> > reset vector.
> 
> OK.  Then you can drop the CONFIG_SPL_MAX_SIZE you have later on since
> that's where we check against it.  Or did I miss a user of it in the
> series?

It's used by the definition of CONFIG_SYS_NAND_U_BOOT_SIZE/DST within  
that same patch.  Plus it's nice to document somewhere prominent, and  
to conform to standard SPL symbols.

-Scott