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

[Simon Glass]

Hi,

On 4 May 2015 at 05:34, Yehuda Yitschak <yehuday at marvell.com> wrote:
> Hey Simon
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: sjg at google.com [mailto:sjg at google.com] On Behalf Of Simon Glass
>> Sent: Sunday, May 03, 2015 21:55
>> To: Yehuda Yitschak
>> Cc: Masahiro Yamada; Hanna Hawa; u-boot at lists.denx.de
>> Subject: Re: [U-Boot] switching to single .config configuration issues
>>
>> Hi Yehuda,
>>
>> On 30 April 2015 at 01:21, Yehuda Yitschak <yehuday at marvell.com> wrote:
>> > 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.
>>
>> I am still not sure what sorts of things are getting compiled int SPL, and thus
>> causing problems. Can you please provide a few details?
>
> We are looking for a very small SPL image that will fit into internal SRAM.
> Therefore we want to compile the minimal set of drivers into the SPL.
> We have added all our drivers to Kconfig infrastructure (not mainlined yet) and so each driver
> We add to u-boot (like PCIe) will be added to SPL and would require manual removal using the dedicated H file

I see. Let's see what Masahiro thinks about this. One good thing with
this proposal is that we would still only have a single config source
file (.config), but I cannot see how it could be implemented without
having multiple output autoconf.h files.

How many options do you need to add for manual removal?

Regards,
Simon

>
>>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> 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
>>
>> Regards,
>> Simon