From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Prabhakar Kushwaha <prabhakar@freescale.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2012 10:58:24 +0530
Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH 3/4] powerpc/85xx:Update NOR code base to
 support debugger
In-Reply-To: <20120307120544.104FF202C7F@gemini.denx.de>
References: <1329296055-28541-1-git-send-email-prabhakar@freescale.com>
	<20120306144531.ECE32202D7D@gemini.denx.de>
	<4F56DEB0.6060500@freescale.com>
	<20120307120544.104FF202C7F@gemini.denx.de>
Message-ID: <4F5EDAF8.1060608@freescale.com>
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

Hi Wolfgang,

On Wednesday 07 March 2012 05:35 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear Prabhakar Kushwaha,
>
> In message<4F56DEB0.6060500@freescale.com>  you wrote:
>>>> +	_mas0 = MAS0_TLBSEL(1) |
>>>> +			MAS0_ESEL(CONFIG_DEBUGGER_TEMP_TLB);
>>> You are using an undocumented CONFIG_ option here.
>> This CONFIG_ is defined as part of documentation patch sent in this series
> CONFIG_ options must be documented in the README.

Sure

>>>> +#if defined(CONFIG_E500_V1_V2)&&   !defined(CONFIG_SYS_RAMBOOT)
>>> What if no such debug support is needed, and code size hurts?
>> sure it will. I agree with you.
>> But this piece of code overcome debug restriction of e500 and e500v2
>> cores and  I think fixing restriction is a good way to go.
> What do we do to disable this code if no debug support is needed, and
> the code size is considered critical?

i will put this piece of code  under #if defined 
(CONFIG_DEBUGGER_TEMP_TLB).
This piece of code will only be enabled when someone wants debugging 
here. And the requirement is temporary TLB.

>>>> +#define CONFIG_DEBUGGER_TEMP_TLB	3
>>> Undocumented!
>>>
>> This CONFIG_ is defined as part of documentation patch sent in this series
> This is not sufficient, see above.

i will add the description.

Regards,
Prabhakar