From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Daniel Mack <daniel@caiaq.de>
Date: Tue, 5 May 2009 12:36:23 +0200
Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH] ARM: unbreak PXA build by defining UP2OCR
In-Reply-To: <20090505102833.BCBFB83420E8@gemini.denx.de>
References: <1241433241-29785-1-git-send-email-daniel@caiaq.de>
	<20090504120514.GD25959@game.jcrosoft.org>
	<20090504184026.EC5EB83420E8@gemini.denx.de>
	<20090504224128.GF13923@game.jcrosoft.org>
	<20090504225857.C088A83420E8@gemini.denx.de>
	<20090505101606.GD22117@buzzloop.caiaq.de>
	<20090505102833.BCBFB83420E8@gemini.denx.de>
Message-ID: <20090505103623.GE22117@buzzloop.caiaq.de>
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

On Tue, May 05, 2009 at 12:28:33PM +0200, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> > That's not the point. I for myself won't bring my board support into
> > U-Boot's mainline (at least not now) because that would help nobody as
> > nobody except for me has the hardware the code was written for. And I
> > guess I'm not the only one.
> 
> Well, that is your decision. But if you chose your place intentionally
> outside the community that you should not be surprised if you only
> receive pretty limited support from that community either.

Well, I was just talking about the config itself - I _do_ merge
everything else upstream.

> > IMO hings should compile, even when the config for this is not in your
> > repository; hope you agree.
> 
> No, I disagree. I don't care at all about any out-of-tree ports  that
> might  exist  anywhere.  I  will  not  waste  any  thoughts about the
> eventual possibility that changes to the  mainline  U-Boot code might
> cause problems in such out-of-tree ports. That's not our problem.

What we're facing here is a clear build breakage that occurs in a
combination of valid configuration flags. It's not an out-of-tree port.
I was just reporting that in order to help other who might face a
similar problem.

> > > In other words - is your concern a real problem, or just a theoretical
> > > one?
> > 
> > Code using that macro is guarded by MONAHANS #ifdefs anyway, his point
> > is solely not to have it in the register headers.
> 
> ...where it could be protected by a similar #ifdef, so I really don't
> see where the problem is.

Me neither.

Daniel