[U-Boot] [PATCH v2] mmc: fix env in mmc with redundant compile error

[Andy Fleming]

On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 8:38 PM, Bo Shen <voice.shen at atmel.com> wrote:

> The commit d196bd8 (env_mmc: add support for redundant environment)
> introduce the following compile error when enable redundant
> environment support with MMC
> ---8<---
> env_mmc.c:149: error: 'env_t' has no member named 'flags'
> env_mmc.c:248: error: 'env_t' has no member named 'flags'
> env_mmc.c:248: error: 'env_t' has no member named 'flags'
> env_mmc.c:250: error: 'env_t' has no member named 'flags'
> env_mmc.c:250: error: 'env_t' has no member named 'flags'
> env_mmc.c:252: error: 'env_t' has no member named 'flags'
> env_mmc.c:252: error: 'env_t' has no member named 'flags'
> env_mmc.c:254: error: 'env_t' has no member named 'flags'
> env_mmc.c:254: error: 'env_t' has no member named 'flags'
> env_mmc.c:267: error: 'env_t' has no member named 'flags'
> make[1]: *** [env_mmc.o] Error 1
> --->8---
>
> Add this patch to fix it
>
> Signed-off-by: Bo Shen <voice.shen at atmel.com>
> Reviewed-by: Michael Heimpold <mhei at heimpold.de>
> ---
> Changes in v2:
>   - s/reduandant/redundant in commit message
>
>  include/environment.h |    6 ++++++
>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/include/environment.h b/include/environment.h
> index 4c6a37b..460ccb4 100644
> --- a/include/environment.h
> +++ b/include/environment.h
> @@ -75,6 +75,12 @@
>  # endif
>  #endif /* CONFIG_ENV_IS_IN_FLASH */
>
> +#if defined(CONFIG_ENV_IS_IN_MMC)
> +# ifdef CONFIG_ENV_OFFSET_REDUND
> +#  define CONFIG_SYS_REDUNDAND_ENVIRONMENT
> +# endif
> +#endif
> +
>


If CONFIG_SYS_REDUNDAND_ENVIRONMENT must be defined when
CONFIG_ENV_OFFSET_REDUND is defined, then isn't it, itself, redundant?

Further, if defining CONFIG_ENV_OFFSET_REDUND is enough to make env_mmc.c
access a variable that is protected by CONFIG_SYS_REDUNDAND_ENVIRONMENT,
then doesn't that mean that those accesses are improperly protected (or
that the "flags" field is)?

It looks like we keep patching over this problem, rather than fixing it....

Andy

PS - Is there a reason it's REDUNDAND, and not REDUNDANT?