[U-Boot] [PATCH] make hang() a weak function

Andreas Bießmann
2013-04-16T11:45:19Z

Hi Albert,

On 04/16/2013 01:36 PM, Albert ARIBAUD wrote:
> Hi Andreas,
>
> On Tue, 16 Apr 2013 12:14:09 +0200, Andreas Bie?mann
> <andreas.devel@googlemail.com> wrote:
>
>> This patch also does some minor coding style cleanups.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Andreas Bie?mann <andreas.devel@googlemail.com>
>>
>> ---
>> arch/arm/lib/board.c | 3 ++-
>> arch/avr32/lib/board.c | 3 ++-
>> arch/blackfin/lib/board.c | 3 ++-
>> arch/m68k/lib/board.c | 3 ++-
>> arch/microblaze/lib/board.c | 5 +++--
>> arch/mips/lib/board.c | 3 ++-
>> arch/nds32/lib/board.c | 3 ++-
>> arch/nios2/lib/board.c | 5 +++--
>> arch/openrisc/lib/board.c | 3 ++-
>> arch/powerpc/lib/board.c | 4 ++--
>> arch/sandbox/lib/board.c | 3 ++-
>> arch/sh/lib/board.c | 3 ++-
>> arch/sparc/lib/board.c | 3 ++-
>> arch/x86/lib/board.c | 3 ++-
>> common/board_f.c | 3 ++-
>> common/spl/spl.c | 3 ++-
>> drivers/mtd/nand/mxc_nand_spl.c | 3 ++-
>> 17 files changed, 36 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)

<snip>

>
> Apart from Stefan's comments: considered standalone, doesn't this patch
> have zero effect? I suspect you intend to use this in a later patch,
> and if so, I would suggest grouping these in a series so that the
> subsequent patch(es) explain this one.

I would like to use a specialized hang() for a not mainlined board, thus
there will no more patches using this currently.

Best regards

Andreas Bie?mann