[U-Boot] PLATFORM_CPPFLAGS ?

[U-Boot] PLATFORM_CPPFLAGS ?

[Timur Tabi]

Why do we define the same macros in config.mk and in the board header file?

config.mk:
PLATFORM_CPPFLAGS += -DCONFIG_E500=1
PLATFORM_CPPFLAGS += -DCONFIG_MPC85xx=1
PLATFORM_CPPFLAGS += -DCONFIG_MPC8572=1

MPC8572DS.h:
#define CONFIG_BOOKE            1       /* BOOKE */
#define CONFIG_E500             1       /* BOOKE e500 family */
#define CONFIG_MPC85xx          1       /* MPC8540/60/55/41/48 */
#define CONFIG_MPC8572          1

Isn't it redundant to have these entries in config.mk?  We seem to be doing this more and more, but config.mk is always board-specific, just like MPC8572DS.h.

-- 
Timur Tabi
Linux kernel developer at Freescale

[U-Boot] PLATFORM_CPPFLAGS ?

[Wolfgang Denk]

Dear Timur Tabi,

In message <4A7B1CFB.3030905@freescale.com> you wrote:
> Why do we define the same macros in config.mk and in the board header file?

We == Freescale here? I agree - I never understood this either.

> Isn't it redundant to have these entries in config.mk? We seem to
> be doing this more and more, but config.mk is always board-specific,
> just like MPC8572DS.h.

Yes, this is redundant, and IMHO bogus. I always thought it was a
local pastime at Freescale...

Best regards,

Wolfgang Denk

-- 
DENX Software Engineering GmbH,     MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: wd at denx.de
A star captain's most solemn oath is that he will give his life, even
his entire crew, rather than violate the Prime Directive.
	-- Kirk, "The Omega Glory", stardate unknown

[U-Boot] PLATFORM_CPPFLAGS ?

[Kumar Gala]

On Aug 6, 2009, at 2:40 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:

> Dear Timur Tabi,
>
> In message <4A7B1CFB.3030905@freescale.com> you wrote:
>> Why do we define the same macros in config.mk and in the board  
>> header file?
>
> We == Freescale here? I agree - I never understood this either.
>
>> Isn't it redundant to have these entries in config.mk? We seem to
>> be doing this more and more, but config.mk is always board-specific,
>> just like MPC8572DS.h.
>
> Yes, this is redundant, and IMHO bogus. I always thought it was a
> local pastime at Freescale...

I think its a copy/paste thing that's just propagated w/o anyone  
asking why.

We probably based the first 85xx port on a 440 seeing as the 440's  
seem to do the following:

board/amcc/ebony/config.mk:PLATFORM_CPPFLAGS += -DCONFIG_440=1

any reason the 440's platforms do this?

- k

[U-Boot] PLATFORM_CPPFLAGS ?

[Wolfgang Denk]

Dear Kumar Gala,

In message <AD67FA15-854B-4862-B4C6-6D4D11059C84@kernel.crashing.org> you wrote:
> 
> I think its a copy/paste thing that's just propagated w/o anyone  
> asking why.

The Wisdom of Crowds in action ;-)

> We probably based the first 85xx port on a 440 seeing as the 440's  
> seem to do the following:
> 
> board/amcc/ebony/config.mk:PLATFORM_CPPFLAGS += -DCONFIG_440=1
> 
> any reason the 440's platforms do this?

There is probably a reason. Most probably not a good one, though ;-)

Best regards,

Wolfgang Denk

-- 
DENX Software Engineering GmbH,     MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: wd at denx.de
"The whole world is about three drinks behind."     - Humphrey Bogart