[U-Boot] switching to single .config configuration issues

[Yehuda Yitschak]

Hey Masahiro

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Masahiro Yamada [mailto:yamada.masahiro at socionext.com]
> Sent: Thursday, April 30, 2015 4:46
> To: Yehuda Yitschak
> Cc: Simon Glass; Hanna Hawa; u-boot at lists.denx.de
> Subject: Re: [U-Boot] switching to single .config configuration issues
> 
> Hi Yehuda,
> 
> 
> 2015-04-29 14:23 GMT+09:00 Yehuda Yitschak <yehuday at marvell.com>:
> > Hey Simon, Masahiro
> >
> > May I suggest an alternative solution to this issue.
> >
> > What if each Kconfigs option could be set as "y" (compile for u-boot
> > only )or "s" (compile for u-boot and SPL) Just as the kernel can set Kconfig
> to "y" or "m".
> >
> > With minor modifications to the Makefile, SPL target will compile "obj-s"
> and u-boot  target will compile "obj-s" and "obj-y"
> >
> > What do you think ?
> 
> 
> Interesting.
> 
> A little comments.
> 
> - Is there any possibility that some files should be compiled for SPL only?
>    (I do not think we have much.)
> 
>    Perhaps,   obj-y : for U-boot only
>               obj-s : for SPL only
>               oby-ys: for both
>       I am not sure..

How about "a" (as in all targets) instead of "sy". It will look better in the menuconfig square brackets
Maybe TPL should also be added as "t" option. 

> 
> - This idea is only applicable for bool options.
>   We still have to keep duplication for int/hex options   such as
> CONFIG_SPL_TEXT_BASE.
> 
>   But, this idea will help clean up much because most of configs are boolean.
> 
> 
> Best Regards
> Masahiro Yamada
> 
> 
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: sjg at google.com [mailto:sjg at google.com] On Behalf Of Simon
> Glass
> >> Sent: Wednesday, April 29, 2015 6:06
> >> To: Hanna Hawa
> >> Cc: u-boot at lists.denx.de; Yehuda Yitschak; Masahiro Yamada
> >> Subject: Re: switching to single .config configuration issues
> >>
> >> +Masahiro (new address)
> >>
> >> Hi Hanna,
> >>
> >> On 27 April 2015 at 07:43, Hanna Hawa <hannah at marvell.com> wrote:
> >> > Hi everyone,
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > I’m working on the latest u-boot 2015.04 trying to rebase my
> >> > repository to latest code.
> >>
> >> I would suggest going with upstream/master (targeting 2015.07) since
> >> there are several driver model changes since 2015.04 (USB, PCI,
> >> Ethernet). There are still patches going in but the bulk of it should be
> there.
> >>
> >> >
> >> > And I have question regarding patch e02ee2548afe (kconfig: switch
> >> > to single .config configuration)
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Issues that I face in the current solution (single .config):
> >> >
> >> > For my usage most of the CONFIG options will not supported in the
> >> > SPL, we need the SPL very tiny and most of the CONFIG will be
> >> > enabled in the u-boot, need to undef/disable(set=n) for every
> >> > CONFIG in scripts/Makefile.uncmd_spl/ include/config_uncmd_spl.h
> >> >
> >> > Also for future usage if we want to delete the defines of the
> >> > commands from the include file and move it to defconfig file, then
> >> > need to undef them in the SPL code.
> >>
> >> Masahiro is the expert here. The idea is to use SPL-specific options for
> SPL.
> >> For example CONFIG_SPL_I2C_SUPPORT. This is much the same as before.
> >>
> >> I suggest you create some SPL options for your new features, so that
> >> they are only enabled in SPL when you want them.
> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Do you planning for another solution for this issue?
> >>
> >> Also, if you push your tree to github (or somewhere) I or Masahiro
> >> might be able to comment on specifics.
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >> Simon
> > _______________________________________________
> > U-Boot mailing list
> > U-Boot at lists.denx.de
> > http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
> 
> 
> 
> --
> Best Regards
> Masahiro Yamada