[U-Boot] [RFC] [PATCH 2/2] crazy: Sort u_boot_cmd at runtime

[Marek Vasut <marex@denx.de>]

Dear Wolfgang Denk,

> Dear Marek Vasut,
> 
> In message <1343483279-11572-2-git-send-email-marex@denx.de> you wrote:
> > This shall eliminate the need for bubblesorting of commands at runtime.
> > Every command definition structure is now put into it's own subsection
> > of section .u_boot_cmd, that is .u_boot_cmd.<name> . These are then put
> > into .u_boot_cmd by linker and lastly, linker uses SORT() over these
> > subsections to make proper order on them. This shall eliminate some
> > runtime overhead.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Marek Vasut <marex@denx.de>
> > Cc: Wolfgang Denk <wd@denx.de>
> > Cc: Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org>
> > ---
> > 
> >  arch/arm/cpu/u-boot.lds |    2 +-
> >  common/cmd_help.c       |    2 +-
> >  include/command.h       |    9 ++++++---
> >  3 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> 
> Seems incomplete in several aspects:

Below the section:

* NOTE * THIS PATCH IS CRAZY

There are a few notes. I'd actually like to know if this approach is correct at 
all, it might break on some crazy configurations or such.

> 1) what about all the non-ARM architecures and the board specific
>    linker scripts?

- This patch affects only arm926t, obviously to make it proper, every
  linkerscript would have to be adjusted

Which sucks, since there're a lot of them. But it can probably be automated.

> 2) what about removing the sort code?

You mean in the _do_help() in common/command.c? We can do not only that, but we 
can do bisect search in find_cmd_tbl() now too. I'm still trying to figure out 
the most optimal implementation. The current one I have trimmed down the time by 
roughly 60%, but I don't like it.

> Best regards,
> 
> Wolfgang Denk

Best regards,
Marek Vasut