[U-Boot] [PATCH 10/13 v3] Makefile: Add Kconfig option CONFIG_SPL_IMAGE to select the SPL binary

[Stefan Roese]

On 03.04.19 14:31, Eugen.Hristev at microchip.com wrote:
> 
> 
> On 03.04.2019 15:22, Stefan Roese wrote:
>> External E-Mail
>>
>>
>> Hi Eugen,
>>
>> On 03.04.19 13:21, Stefan Roese wrote:
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>>>>> If I try to just use menuconfig and change this value to something
>>>>> else,
>>>>> build fails. The purpose of this Kconfig is to name the SPL filename as
>>>>> per the config's desire ?
>>>>>
>>>>> Or in fact is "which binary file to use to make the Combined SPL+U-BOOT
>>>>> mega image" ?
>>>>
>>>> Ok, the commit message explains it pretty well, but the Kconfig help is
>>>> totally different... hence the confusion sorry.
>>>> So we need to either make a choice submenu in this Kconfig : either this
>>>> or that; or, do exactly what the Kconfig says: rename the output binary
>>>> into the value of this Kconfig.
>>>>
>>>> Does this make sense ?
>>>
>>> You are suggesting to add this SPL_IMAGE as choice instead of its
>>> current implementation? That might be better, yes. Let me look into
>>> this...
>>
>> I did look into this and I would prefer to stay with the original
>> implementation of the defaults. Changing this into a Kconfig choice
>> makes this a bit more complex in the Kconfig. Additionally and even
>> more important (for my personal feeling), the original implementation
>> is more in line with the BUILD_TARGET implemenation directly below
>> this new implementation.
>>
>> So if you don't object, I would like to send a new version with the
>> original implementation but with a "better" (more correct)
>> description in Kconfig.
>>
>> What do you think?
> 
> This would imply that your new description has to state that if an
> incorrect binary name is configured here, the build will fail (?)

No. My main reasoning here is, that this is also not included in the
description of "BUILD_TARGET" below. Here you can also change the
selected value (via Kconfig help, no user input needed) to a new value
that is not supported, which also results in a build error.

I would like to not make this overly complex here. If a user wants
to do something stupid by defining this (or some other Kconfig
option) to an unsupported value, we can't really stop him.

If you really think this is necessary, I will add a sentence to the
Kconfig text, to only select "supported" values here. But again, I
would prefer to not do this.

Thanks,
Stefan