[U-Boot] [PATCH] libfdt: replace ARCH_FIXUP_FDT with ARCH_FIXUP_FDT_MEMORY

[Masahiro Yamada]

Hi Simon,


2016-10-06 1:09 GMT+09:00 Simon Glass <sjg at chromium.org>:
> Hi Masahiro,
>
> On 4 October 2016 at 21:27, Masahiro Yamada
> <yamada.masahiro at socionext.com> wrote:
>> Hi Simon,
>>
>> 2016-10-05 0:37 GMT+09:00 Simon Glass <sjg at chromium.org>:
>>
>>>> diff --git a/common/image-fdt.c b/common/image-fdt.c
>>>> index 3d23608..91970d4 100644
>>>> --- a/common/image-fdt.c
>>>> +++ b/common/image-fdt.c
>>>> @@ -458,6 +458,11 @@ __weak int ft_verify_fdt(void *fdt)
>>>>         return 1;
>>>>  }
>>>>
>>>> +__weak int arch_fixup_fdt(void *blob)
>>>> +{
>>>> +       return 0;
>>>> +}
>>>
>>> Do we have to have a weak function? I was hoping we could avoid these
>>> since they make it hard to figure out at build time what code is
>>> executed.
>>>
>>
>>
>> This hunk is just reverting Michal's commit e2f88dfd2d9671.
>>
>> Is it better to add an empty stub to every architecture that may call it?
>
> IMO all the FDT fixups need work. Perhaps we need a linker list
> approach so we can declare these fixups more easily? Or perhaps that
> will just make things harder to figure out?

This is up to you.


My interest is to not touch memory node,
but need other DT fixups.

I sent v2 with no-op stubs instead of the weak function.



-- 
Best Regards
Masahiro Yamada