From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Lukasz Majewski <l.majewski@samsung.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2012 08:24:28 +0200
Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH v2 05/21] pmic: Introduce power_board_init()
 method at ./lib/board.c file
In-Reply-To: <20121009180505.GA1137@bill-the-cat>
References: <1349425003-32523-1-git-send-email-l.majewski@samsung.com>
	<1349425003-32523-6-git-send-email-l.majewski@samsung.com>
	<5073E631.2030402@denx.de>
	<20121009122548.74467dc2@amdc308.digital.local>
	<50740BCB.9010607@denx.de> <20121009180505.GA1137@bill-the-cat>
Message-ID: <20121010082428.427731e5@amdc308.digital.local>
List-Id: <u-boot.lists.denx.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: u-boot@lists.denx.de

Hi Tom,

> On Tue, Oct 09, 2012 at 01:34:35PM +0200, Stefano Babic wrote:
> > On 09/10/2012 12:25, Lukasz Majewski wrote:
> [snip]
> > >> We use often the "weak" mechanism to avoid that a board
> > >> maintainer is constrained to implement an empty function only to
> > >> make happy the linker. It is better to declare the function as
> > >> weak and call it with the same schema, such as
> > >> board_power_init() (several board_* are weak)
> > > 
> > > Correct me if I'm wrong, but weren't we recently trying to remove
> > > functions defined as weak?
> > 
> > I am not aware of it. I see several patches in last days adding weak
> > function. Several weak function are present in the recent added SPL
> > framework.
> 
> We should use weak functions when we can provide a functioning in many
> cases default but need to allow for overrides in some cases.  We
> shouldn't use them when everyone needs to define the function and it
> has to do something.
> 

Ok, thanks for clarification :-).

I will define and use board_power_init() as a __weak function.


-- 
Best regards,

Lukasz Majewski

Samsung Poland R&D Center | Linux Platform Group