From: Stefan Roese <sr@denx.de>
To: u-boot@lists.denx.de
Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH] cfi_flash: Make all flash access functions weak
Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2008 10:34:03 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200811171034.03928.sr@denx.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20081117100145.3fe0c4b2@hskinnemo-gx745.norway.atmel.com>
On Monday 17 November 2008, Haavard Skinnemoen wrote:
> Stefan Roese <sr@denx.de> wrote:
> > Old version without weak aliases:
> > text data bss dec hex filename
> > 280964 20232 50788 351984 55ef0 ./u-boot
> >
> > New version with weak aliases:
> > text data bss dec hex filename
> > 280520 20232 50788 351540 55d34 ./u-boot
> >
> > So the difference is 444 bytes (with gcc 4.2.2). I have to admit that
> > this is more than I thought. If necessary I could make this weak change
> > conditionally of course. I just didn't want to "pollute" to the source
> > with more #ifdef's.
>
> Looks like it's 444 bytes _smaller_ with weak functions...that's a bit
> surprising. From you comment, it sounds like it's really 444 bytes
> larger. Did you mix up the numbers?
Yes.
> If it's really 444 bytes larger, I think that's a bit much for
> something as simple as memory accessors. Ideally, they should boil down
> to a single instruction each.
>
> Perhaps you could allow overriding them in the board header by doing
> something like
>
> #ifndef flash_write8
> # #define flash_write8(value, addr) __raw_writeb(value, addr)
> ...
>
> in cfi_flash.c?
I could do it this way, sure. But how about this version:
static void __flash_write8(u8 value, void *addr)
{
__raw_writeb(value, addr);
}
...
#ifdef CONFIG_CFI_FLASH_USE_WEAK_ACCESSORS
void flash_write8(u8 value, void *addr)__attribute__((weak, alias("__flash_write8")));
...
#else
#define flash_read8 __flash_read8
...
#endif
We would still have the original accessor functions this way. And the
resulting source code looks a little "better" to me (less #ifdef's).
Best regards,
Stefan
=====================================================================
DENX Software Engineering GmbH, MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
Phone: +49-8142-66989-0 Fax: +49-8142-66989-80 Email: office at denx.de
=====================================================================
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-11-17 9:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-11-12 12:31 [U-Boot] [PATCH] cfi_flash: Make all flash access functions weak Stefan Roese
2008-11-13 8:18 ` Haavard Skinnemoen
2008-11-17 8:45 ` Stefan Roese
2008-11-17 8:54 ` Stefan Roese
2008-11-17 9:01 ` Haavard Skinnemoen
2008-11-17 9:34 ` Stefan Roese [this message]
2008-11-17 9:40 ` Haavard Skinnemoen
2008-11-17 9:49 ` Stefan Roese
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=200811171034.03928.sr@denx.de \
--to=sr@denx.de \
--cc=u-boot@lists.denx.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.