[U-Boot] [v3 patch 2/4] SMDK6400: Fix some label undefined in build error

[seedshope <bocui107@gmail.com>]

On 01/14/2011 11:45 PM, seedshope wrote:
> On 01/14/2011 02:07 AM, Albert ARIBAUD wrote:
>> Le 13/01/2011 14:36, seedshope a ?crit :
>>> Modify Makefile for cpu_init.c and Start.s use some label,this defined
>>> u-boot.lds of arch/arm/cpu/arm1176. But SMDK6400 use the link script
>>> board/samsung/smdk6400/u-boot-nand.lds. So add some label form 
>>> u-boot.lds
>>> to u-boot-nand.lds
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: seedshope<bocui107@gmail.com>
>>>
>>> diff --git a/arch/arm/cpu/arm1176/s3c64xx/Makefile 
>>> b/arch/arm/cpu/arm1176/s3c64xx/Makefile
>>> index 0785b19..f4b9574 100644
>>> --- a/arch/arm/cpu/arm1176/s3c64xx/Makefile
>>> +++ b/arch/arm/cpu/arm1176/s3c64xx/Makefile
>>> @@ -30,12 +30,15 @@ LIB    = $(obj)lib$(SOC).o
>>>
>>>   SOBJS    = reset.o
>>>
>>> -COBJS-$(CONFIG_S3C6400)    += cpu_init.o speed.o
>>> +COBJS-$(CONFIG_S3C6400)    += speed.o
>>>   COBJS-y    += timer.o
>>>
>>> +CPUINIT    = cpu_init.o
>>> +
>>>   OBJS    := $(addprefix $(obj),$(SOBJS) $(COBJS-y))
>>> +CPUINIT := $(addprefix $(obj),$(CPUINIT))
>>>
>>> -all:    $(obj).depend $(START) $(LIB)
>>> +all:    $(obj).depend $(START) $(LIB) $(CPUINIT)
>>>
>>>   $(LIB):    $(OBJS)
>>>       $(call cmd_link_o_target, $(OBJS))
>>
>> Not sure I get what's the problem and how exactly this changes solves 
>> it. Can you detail this particular issue?
The part of u-boot-nand.lds as following:

         . = ALIGN(4);
         .text      :
         {
           arch/arm/cpu/arm1176/start.o  (.text)
           arch/arm/cpu/arm1176/s3c64xx/cpu_init.o       (.text)
           *(.text)
         }

I reference start.s to get the patch.;-)

Thanks,
seedshope
> The issue is mem_ctrl_asm_init redefine in 
> arch/arm/cpu/arm1176/s3c64xx/cpu_init.s.
>
> At first, the link script file include cpu_init.s in 
> board/samsung/smd6400/u-boot-nand.s, If I separate the cpu_init.o from 
> COBJS-$(CONFIG_S3C6400), I guess cmd_link_o_target will deal with 
> cpu_init.o. So the link script will double link the cpu_init file.
>
> I have two method to solve it.
> first: see the patch
> second: Modify the link script
>
> But I feel, the first method is safe.
>
> I asked a question. I will RR on next, The patch1 and patch3 have 
> already ok,  Do I only send patch2 and patch4?
>>
>> Amicalement,
>