From: "José Miguel Gonçalves" <jose.goncalves@inov.pt>
To: u-boot@lists.denx.de
Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH v2 09/11] S3C24XX: Add NAND Flash driver
Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2012 19:34:47 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <50576D47.3080001@inov.pt> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120917182720.GE16252@bill-the-cat>
On 17-09-2012 19:27, Tom Rini wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 07:05:48PM +0100, Jos? Miguel Gon?alves wrote:
>> On 17-09-2012 18:56, Tom Rini wrote:
>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>>> Hash: SHA1
>>>
>>> On 09/17/12 10:08, Jos? Miguel Gon?alves wrote:
>>>> On 17-09-2012 17:57, Tom Rini wrote:
>>>>> On Sun, Sep 16, 2012 at 10:16:47AM +0100, Jos? Miguel Gon?alves
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> On 09/14/2012 08:01 PM, Tom Rini wrote:
>>>>>>> On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 07:45:40PM +0100, Jos? Miguel
>>>>>>> Gon?alves wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 14-09-2012 19:21, Marek Vasut wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Dear Jos? Miguel Gon?alves,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> NAND Flash driver with HW ECC for the S3C24XX SoCs.
>>>>>>>>>> Currently it only supports SLC NAND chips.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Jos? Miguel Gon?alves
>>>>>>>>>> <jose.goncalves@inov.pt>
>>>>>>>>> [...]
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> +#include <common.h> +#include <nand.h> +#include
>>>>>>>>>> <asm/io.h> +#include <asm/arch/s3c24xx_cpu.h> +#include
>>>>>>>>>> <asm/errno.h> + +#define MAX_CHIPS 2 +static int
>>>>>>>>>> nand_cs[MAX_CHIPS] = { 0, 1 }; + +#ifdef
>>>>>>>>>> CONFIG_SPL_BUILD +#define printf(arg...) do {} while
>>>>>>>>>> (0)
>>>>>>>>> This doesn't seem quite right ...
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 1) this should be in CPU directory 2) should be enabled
>>>>>>>>> only if CONFIG_SPL_SERIAL_SUPPORT is not set 3) should be
>>>>>>>>> inline function, not a macro
>>>>>>>> 1) and 3) OK. Don't quite understand 2). I want to remove
>>>>>>>> the printfs in the SPL build, as it would blown up the
>>>>>>>> internal SoC RAM space available. So why add a condition
>>>>>>>> with CONFIG_SPL_SERIAL_SUPPORT?
>>>>>>> You've got 8KB, based on the final patch in the series. At
>>>>>>> least in my SPL series that's still enough to get you
>>>>>>> printf/puts (I believe 4kb was the cutoff where that had to
>>>>>>> be dropped).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Barely:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> $ size u-boot-spl text data bss dec
>>>>>> hex filename 3337 8 588 3933
>>>>>> f5d u-boot-spl
>>>>>>
>>>>>> $ size u-boot-spl-printf text data bss dec
>>>>>> hex filename 7968 8 604 8580
>>>>>> 2184 u-boot-spl-printf
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The printf is not so important that justifies exhausting the
>>>>>> IRAM space available and preventing any future SPL
>>>>>> expansion...
>>>>> There's two parts to this: - What else can you do in a single
>>>>> binary, in theory? Is there boot medium detection and you would
>>>>> want to have, for example, NAND and SD support in the same
>>>>> binary? I would say memory is meant for using, but this is a
>>>>> board maintainer decision and that's you :)
>>>> That's exactly what I've got in mind when I talked about a future
>>>> expansion! Being able to boot also from an SD card. With only 8KB
>>>> for .text and .data, I can not use printfs in the SPL for this
>>>> platform (at least with the present printf support for SPL).
>>>>
>>>>> - We have a define today (CONFIG_SPL_LIBCOMMON_SUPPORT) that
>>>>> toggles printf or no printf. If we really need to say yes to
>>>>> LIBCOMMON_SUPPORT and no to printf, we need finer grained config
>>>>> options and then a do-nothing printf is used for SPL. Doing the
>>>>> opt-out driver by driver just punts this problem down the road to
>>>>> the next developer and that's not very nice (and adding
>>>>> CONFIG_SPL_PRINTF_SUPPORT shouldn't be a big patch, modify a few
>>>>> Makefiles, update a bunch of config files, add
>>>>> common/spl/dummy_funcs.c and a __weak printf).
>>> OK, so please take a stab at option two, on top of my SPL series,
>>> keeping in mind what Scott has said (which makes sense) because
>>> otherwise you'll be changing a lot of MMC files too to drop out printf :)
>> The solution that I sorted out on the current SPL framework was to add this:
>>
>> #ifdef CONFIG_SPL_BUILD
>> #define printf(arg...) do {} while (0)
>> #ifdef CONFIG_SPL_SERIAL_SUPPORT
>> #define puts(arg) serial_puts(arg)
>> #endif
>> #endif
>>
>> on a CPU specific header. Marek told me to not use macros, but to
>> use inline functions instead, but has I told earlier on this thread,
>> I am unable to do that. Suggestions for doing this in a better way
>> are welcome...
> It's gotta go in <common.h>, and something like
> /* Big comment what / why */
> #if !defined(CONFIG_SPL_BUILD) || \
> (CONFIG_SPL_BUILD && CONFIG_SPL_PRINTF_SUPPORT)
> void putc(...);
> void puts(...);
> int printf(....);
> #else
> #define putc(c) serial_putc(c)
> #define puts(s) serial_puts(s)
> #define printf(arg...) do {} while (0)
> #endif
>
Are macros OK to remove printf() and to replace putc()/puts() by
serial_putc()/serial_puts() in the SPL?
Shouldn?t we be using inline functions instead?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-09-17 18:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 84+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-09-14 17:28 [U-Boot] [PATCH v2 00/11] S3C24XX: Add support to MINI2416 board José Miguel Gonçalves
2012-09-14 17:28 ` [U-Boot] [PATCH v2 01/11] ARM: fix relocation on ARM926EJS José Miguel Gonçalves
2012-09-15 18:03 ` Marek Vasut
2012-09-16 9:45 ` José Miguel Gonçalves
2012-09-16 10:06 ` Marek Vasut
2012-09-16 10:16 ` José Miguel Gonçalves
2012-09-16 15:36 ` Marek Vasut
2012-09-16 16:26 ` José Miguel Gonçalves
2012-09-16 17:17 ` Marek Vasut
2012-09-17 6:28 ` Christian Riesch
2012-09-17 8:34 ` José Miguel Gonçalves
2012-09-17 9:03 ` Christian Riesch
2012-09-17 9:20 ` José Miguel Gonçalves
2012-09-17 17:18 ` Tom Rini
2012-09-17 17:23 ` Scott Wood
2012-09-17 17:32 ` Tom Rini
2012-09-17 17:26 ` Marek Vasut
2012-09-17 17:35 ` Tom Rini
2012-09-17 17:48 ` Marek Vasut
2012-09-17 18:00 ` Tom Rini
2012-09-17 17:27 ` José Miguel Gonçalves
2012-10-04 14:24 ` Albert ARIBAUD
2012-09-14 17:28 ` [U-Boot] [PATCH v2 02/11] S3C24XX: Add core support for Samsung's S3C24XX SoCs José Miguel Gonçalves
2012-09-14 18:03 ` Marek Vasut
[not found] ` <505375E3.6050005@inov.pt>
2012-09-14 18:25 ` Marek Vasut
2012-09-14 19:01 ` Scott Wood
2012-09-14 19:07 ` Marek Vasut
2012-09-14 19:17 ` Scott Wood
2012-09-14 18:39 ` Tom Rini
2012-09-14 17:28 ` [U-Boot] [PATCH v2 03/11] serial: Add support to 4 ports in serial_s3c24x0 José Miguel Gonçalves
2012-09-14 17:28 ` [U-Boot] [PATCH v2 04/11] serial: Use a more precise baud rate generation for serial_s3c24x0 José Miguel Gonçalves
2012-09-14 18:05 ` Marek Vasut
2012-09-14 17:28 ` [U-Boot] [PATCH v2 05/11] serial: Remove unnecessary delay in serial_s3c24x0 José Miguel Gonçalves
2012-09-14 18:05 ` Marek Vasut
2012-09-14 17:28 ` [U-Boot] [PATCH v2 06/11] rtc: Improve rtc_get() on s3c24x0_rtc José Miguel Gonçalves
2012-09-14 18:06 ` Marek Vasut
2012-09-14 17:28 ` [U-Boot] [PATCH v2 07/11] rtc: Fix rtc_reset() " José Miguel Gonçalves
2012-09-14 18:07 ` Marek Vasut
2012-09-14 17:28 ` [U-Boot] [PATCH v2 08/11] rtc: Don't allow setting unsuported years " José Miguel Gonçalves
2012-09-14 18:08 ` Marek Vasut
2012-09-14 17:29 ` [U-Boot] [PATCH v2 09/11] S3C24XX: Add NAND Flash driver José Miguel Gonçalves
2012-09-14 18:21 ` Marek Vasut
2012-09-14 18:45 ` José Miguel Gonçalves
2012-09-14 19:01 ` Tom Rini
2012-09-16 9:16 ` José Miguel Gonçalves
2012-09-17 16:57 ` Tom Rini
2012-09-17 17:03 ` Scott Wood
2012-09-17 17:08 ` Tom Rini
2012-09-17 17:13 ` Scott Wood
2012-09-17 17:08 ` José Miguel Gonçalves
2012-09-17 17:56 ` Tom Rini
2012-09-17 18:05 ` José Miguel Gonçalves
2012-09-17 18:27 ` Tom Rini
2012-09-17 18:34 ` José Miguel Gonçalves [this message]
2012-09-17 18:56 ` Tom Rini
2012-09-14 19:24 ` Scott Wood
2012-09-14 20:20 ` Tom Rini
2012-09-14 20:29 ` Scott Wood
2012-09-17 11:11 ` José Miguel Gonçalves
2012-09-14 18:47 ` Tom Rini
2012-09-14 17:29 ` [U-Boot] [PATCH v2 10/11] Add u-boot-ubl.bin target to the Makefile José Miguel Gonçalves
2012-09-14 18:22 ` Marek Vasut
2012-09-14 19:08 ` Tom Rini
2012-09-16 9:27 ` José Miguel Gonçalves
2012-09-17 6:47 ` Christian Riesch
2012-09-17 8:30 ` José Miguel Gonçalves
2012-09-17 9:10 ` Christian Riesch
2012-09-17 9:24 ` José Miguel Gonçalves
2012-09-17 14:45 ` Tom Rini
2012-09-17 16:29 ` Marek Vasut
2012-09-17 16:35 ` Tom Rini
2012-09-17 16:27 ` Scott Wood
2012-09-17 16:51 ` Tom Rini
2012-09-17 17:32 ` Scott Wood
2012-09-17 17:53 ` Tom Rini
2012-09-17 18:16 ` Scott Wood
2012-09-17 19:52 ` Wolfgang Denk
2012-09-14 17:29 ` [U-Boot] [PATCH v2 11/11] S3C24XX: Add support to MINI2416 board José Miguel Gonçalves
2012-09-14 18:58 ` Tom Rini
2012-09-16 9:11 ` José Miguel Gonçalves
2012-09-17 14:39 ` Tom Rini
2012-09-17 14:47 ` José Miguel Gonçalves
2012-09-17 15:11 ` Tom Rini
2012-09-18 12:11 ` José Miguel Gonçalves
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=50576D47.3080001@inov.pt \
--to=jose.goncalves@inov.pt \
--cc=u-boot@lists.denx.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox