From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Aneesh V Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2011 20:26:37 +0530 Subject: [U-Boot] SPL framework re-design In-Reply-To: <20110627092728.D19B91A23C3F@gemini.denx.de> References: <4DF9B9E0.8020206@ti.com> <20110616104716.762DD19E5AC3@gemini.denx.de> <4DFB8579.1020309@ti.com> <4E00799A.5040302@ti.com> <20110625121050.6CAAB20155D@gemini.denx.de> <4E0804DC.8090805@ti.com> <20110627092728.D19B91A23C3F@gemini.denx.de> Message-ID: <4E089A25.4050009@ti.com> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de Dear Wolfgang, On Monday 27 June 2011 02:57 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote: > Dear Aneesh, > > In message<4E0804DC.8090805@ti.com> you wrote: >> >>>> +spl: $(TIMESTAMP_FILE) $(VERSION_FILE) depend >>>> + $(MAKE) -C spl/ all >>>> + >>>> $(obj)mmc_spl/u-boot-mmc-spl.bin: mmc_spl >>> >>> The mmc_spl/ is suppoed to be moved into spl/, isn't it? >> >> This patch was intended only as a prototype for the new directory >> structure. I didn't bother to touch the existing stuff. > > I see. > >>>> --- /dev/null >>>> +++ b/spl/Makefile >>>> @@ -0,0 +1,94 @@ >>>> +# >>>> +# (C) Copyright 2011 Daniel Schwierzeck, daniel.schwierzeck at googlemail.com. >>> >>> Really??? >> >> I copied Daniel's Makefile and started from there. > > I guess the only real part that was left from the old file is the GPL > header... > >>> As Mike mentioned, we can eventually directly include the OBJSs here >>> and omit the building of libraries? >> >> I can't seem to find a mail from Mike on this thread. Did I miss any >> mail? > > I can find it either. I don't know what I had in mind then. > >> Do you mean re-using equivalent libraries from the normal U-Boot >> without re-compiling them? > > There are actually two different topics here: > > - The first is how to link all the objects in the spl/ tree together. > As I understand, you proposal was to link all objects in each of the > subdirectories into a library, and then link all the libraries > together. > > Instead of doing this, we could as well just maintain a list of > objects and then link all these together directly, without creating > libraries first. > Is this like a make variable that keeps accumulating objects from sub-directories? If so, is that through a *.mk at each level and including all these *.mk at the top level Makefile. Or is there some other idea? best regards, Aneesh