[U-Boot] [PATCH v2] Create configuration option for restricted ns16550 functions

[Kim Phillips <kim.phillips@freescale.com>]

On Wed, 18 Feb 2009 12:02:02 -0800 (PST)
Ron Madrid <ron_madrid@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

> --- On Wed, 2/18/09, Kim Phillips <kim.phillips@freescale.com> wrote:
> > diff --git a/include/configs/SIMPC8313.h
> > b/include/configs/SIMPC8313.h
> > index f62a705..6219722 100644
> > --- a/include/configs/SIMPC8313.h
> > +++ b/include/configs/SIMPC8313.h
> > @@ -205,6 +205,7 @@
> >  #define CONFIG_SYS_NS16550
> >  #define CONFIG_SYS_NS16550_SERIAL
> >  #define CONFIG_SYS_NS16550_REG_SIZE	1
> > +#define CONFIG_SYS_NS16550_MIN_FUNCTIONS
> 
> If you case the CONFIG_SYS_NS16550_MIN_FUNCTIONS within a #ifdef
> CONFIG_NAND_SPL you don't need the following definitions.
> 
> > +#ifndef CONFIG_SYS_NS16550_MIN_FUNCTIONS
> >  char	NS16550_getc   (NS16550_t com_port);
> >  int	NS16550_tstc   (NS16550_t com_port);
> >  void	NS16550_reinit (NS16550_t com_port, int
> > baud_divisor);
> > +#else
> > +#define NS16550_getc(com_port) 0
> > +#define NS16550_tstc(com_port) 0
> > +#define NS16550_reinit(com_port, baud_divisor)
> > +#endif
> 
> I was going to send a patch after this one was accepted that takes care of
> the SIMPC8313 build.  Should I have sent the two of them together?  I
> thought that they would be considered too different.  It would be this
> below.
> 
> diff --git a/include/configs/SIMPC8313.h b/include/configs/SIMPC8313.h
> index a616236..59e43be 100644
> --- a/include/configs/SIMPC8313.h
> +++ b/include/configs/SIMPC8313.h
> @@ -212,6 +212,10 @@
>  #define CONFIG_SYS_NS16550_COM1		(CONFIG_SYS_IMMR+0x4500)
>  #define CONFIG_SYS_NS16550_COM2		(CONFIG_SYS_IMMR+0x4600)
>  
> +#ifdef CONFIG_NAND_SPL
> +#define CONFIG_NS16550_MIN_FUNCTIONS

I think you're right - this really needs to be a CONFIG_ without SYS_.
Sorry.

> If you'd like, I can send this one now or you could put the new config
> option inside of a #ifdef CONFIG_NAND_SPL.

one more time: