[PATCH] s5p4418_nanopi2: Drop unnecessary BOARD_EARLY_INIT_F usage

[Stefan Bosch]

On 31.03.26 20:15, Tom Rini wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 31, 2026 at 05:40:01PM +0000, Stefan Bosch wrote:
> 
>> Hi Tom,
>>
>> thank you for the patch. You are right, board_early_init_f can be removed.
>> But where is CONFIG_BOARD_EARLY_INIT_F enabled, I didn't found it. Have I
>> missed something?
> 
> This might be another case (since I sent out a dozen similar patches)
> where the platform wasn't actually enabling it either and so the commit
> message is wrong in that regard. I can fix that when applying if that's
> OK with you.
> 
That is OK for me, thank you.

>>
>> Regards
>> Stefan
>>
>> On 25.03.26 20:00, Tom Rini wrote:
>>> This platform enables CONFIG_BOARD_EARLY_INIT_F and then has a
>>> do-nothing board_early_init_f function. Change to not enabling the
>>> option and so not needing an empty function. >
>>> Signed-off-by: Tom Rini <trini at konsulko.com>
>>> ---
>>> Cc: Stefan Bosch <stefan_b at posteo.net>
>>> ---
>>>    board/friendlyarm/nanopi2/board.c | 5 -----
>>>    1 file changed, 5 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/board/friendlyarm/nanopi2/board.c b/board/friendlyarm/nanopi2/board.c
>>> index 4dff32e10d6b..ca8ae529ddf4 100644
>>> --- a/board/friendlyarm/nanopi2/board.c
>>> +++ b/board/friendlyarm/nanopi2/board.c
>>> @@ -406,11 +406,6 @@ __exit:
>>>     * call from u-boot
>>>     */
>>> -int board_early_init_f(void)
>>> -{
>>> -	return 0;
>>> -}
>>> -
>>>    int board_init(void)
>>>    {
>>>    	bd_hwrev_init();
> 

Reviewed-by: Stefan Bosch <stefan_b at posteo.net>