[PATCH] rockchip: px30-board-tpl: Use CONFIG_TPL_BANNER_PRINT flag

[Łukasz Czechowski]

Hi Quentin,

Thanks for the hints. Matching the parent ifdef with non-PX30 TPL
implementation is indeed a good idea. I'll send the updated version of
the patch.

Best regards,
Lukasz

wt., 16 kwi 2024 o 15:22 Quentin Schulz
<quentin.schulz at theobroma-systems.com> napisał(a):
>
> Hi Lukasz,
>
> Please use scripts/get_maintainer.pl to set the Cc and To recipients of
> your mail to make sure it reaches the appropriate people explicitly.
>
> $ scripts/get_maintainer.pl arch/arm/mach-rockchip/px30-board-tpl.c
> Tom Rini <trini at konsulko.com> (maintainer:ARM)
> Simon Glass <sjg at chromium.org> (maintainer:ARM ROCKCHIP)
> Philipp Tomsich <philipp.tomsich at vrull.eu> (maintainer:ARM ROCKCHIP)
> Kever Yang <kever.yang at rock-chips.com> (maintainer:ARM ROCKCHIP)
> u-boot at lists.denx.de (open list)
>
> (one can use scripts/get_maintainer.pl on patches instead of files, and
> it'll return whatever is needed).
>
> Plugging `b4` here as well, because it's a pretty nice tool to use:
> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/utils/b4/b4.git/ One can install it with
> pip. I use it for Linux kernel and U-Boot contributions for a couple of
> years now and I'm not going back to manual workflow :)
>
> b4 prep --auto-to-cc would set everything up properly for you.
>
> On 4/16/24 14:47, Lukasz Czechowski wrote:
> > Display TPL init information message only when TPL_BANNER_PRINT
> > configuration entry is set. This allows to disable information
> > message in case logs on UART are unwanted.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Lukasz Czechowski <lukasz.czechowski at thaumatec.com>
>
> This matches Rockchip's non-PX30 TPL, so:
>
> Reviewed-by: Quentin Schulz <quentin.schulz at theobroma-systems.com>
>
> > ---
> >   arch/arm/mach-rockchip/px30-board-tpl.c | 2 ++
> >   1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/px30-board-tpl.c b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/px30-board-tpl.c
> > index 637a5e1b18..a660816db0 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/px30-board-tpl.c
> > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-rockchip/px30-board-tpl.c
> > @@ -46,7 +46,9 @@ void board_init_f(ulong dummy)
> >        * printhex8(0x1234);
> >        * printascii("string");
> >        */
> > +#if CONFIG_TPL_BANNER_PRINT
> >       printascii("U-Boot TPL board init\n");
> > +#endif
>
> I'm wondering if we shouldn't have the parent ifdef also match the logic
> of the non-PX30 TPL?
>
> #if defined(CONFIG_DEBUG_UART) && defined(CONFIG_TPL_SERIAL)
>
> instead of
>
> #if defined(CONFIG_DEBUG_UART)
>
> ?
>
> Thanks,
> Quentin