From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Steven Scholz Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 13:54:33 +0100 Subject: [U-Boot-Users] CONFIG_BOOTBINFUNC for AT91RM9200 In-Reply-To: <20041123172308.9BAE7C1430@atlas.denx.de> References: <20041123172308.9BAE7C1430@atlas.denx.de> Message-ID: <41A48489.80203@imc-berlin.de> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de Wolfgang Denk wrote: > In message <41A36CFE.9050900@imc-berlin.de> you wrote: > >>Hmm. So I suggest replacing it with CONFIG_INIT_LOWLEVEL or CONFIG_LOWLEVEL_INIT. > > > Hmmm.. CONFIG or CFG? And what exactly is low (vs. high?) level here? > > >>But then: these init steps (clocks and memory) are vital for U-Boot to run. So >>why do we need this define anyway if these steps should be done always... ? > > > Good question. The only reason I can think of is to allob such a > two-stage boot loader as used by Atmel on the AT91RM9200DK. So we check if all other arm920t boards have an implementation of memsetup(). Then kick out CONFIG_INIT_CRITICAL and introduce CONFIG_DO_NOT_MAKE_LOWLEVEL_INIT or something like that !? ;-) -- Steven Scholz