[U-Boot] SPL building unwanted code
trini at konsulko.com
Mon Aug 26 19:32:28 UTC 2019
On Thu, Aug 22, 2019 at 03:41:45PM -0500, Adam Ford wrote:
> I have boards (omap3_logic and omap3_logic_somlv) which do not want
> USB enabled for SPL yet SPL is showing USB chunks being compiled into
> I had to create a patch  which disables the USB host controller
> when in SPL, yet some of the framework is still present. There appears
> to be an option in the SPL menu for enabling/disabling "Support USB
> host drivers" and an option for "Support USB Gadget drivers" and for
> me, neither are selected. What I'd like to do is kill off all the USB
> code inside SPL to shrink the size.
> When I look at the Makefile for the USB host, there doesn't appear to
> be any checks for whether or not we're in SPL.
> There also appears to be an inconsistency in where to place the
> options for enabling something in SPL. In some cases, high-level
> options are listed in SPL/TPL menu, but in other instances, the
> options are listed under the "Device Drivers" menu. What I'd like to
> do is add a menu option for CONFIG_SPL_USB which lets people turn off
> all USB code when in SPL if they don't want any, then fix up the
> Makefiles to use the SPL/TPL macros to determine if we need to build
> or not.
> My question is is...Where should the menu item for enabling
> CONFIG_SPL_USB be used, in the SPL/TPL menu or the USB menu?
We're indeed not consistent enough here. Given how large
common/spl/Kconfig is already today I suspect the right answer is that
more things should be grouped closer to their non-SPL/TPL counterpart
questions, with correct depends on lines. And options with names such
that we can't use CONFIG_IS_ENABLED(FOO)/obj-$(CONFIG_$(SPL_TPL_)_FOO)
need to be renamed as well. That should in turn lead to being able to
correctly drop USB out of SPL for example.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the U-Boot