From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from phobos.denx.de (phobos.denx.de [85.214.62.61]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 24ADEC05027 for ; Fri, 10 Feb 2023 12:41:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: from h2850616.stratoserver.net (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by phobos.denx.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id C3D6985FB9; Fri, 10 Feb 2023 13:41:39 +0100 (CET) Authentication-Results: phobos.denx.de; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=konsulko.com Authentication-Results: phobos.denx.de; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=u-boot-bounces@lists.denx.de Authentication-Results: phobos.denx.de; dkim=pass (1024-bit key; unprotected) header.d=konsulko.com header.i=@konsulko.com header.b="KbUAMG1U"; dkim-atps=neutral Received: by phobos.denx.de (Postfix, from userid 109) id 21A8485FAF; Fri, 10 Feb 2023 13:41:35 +0100 (CET) Received: from mail-qt1-x833.google.com (mail-qt1-x833.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::833]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by phobos.denx.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A19FE85FB1 for ; Fri, 10 Feb 2023 13:41:31 +0100 (CET) Authentication-Results: phobos.denx.de; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=konsulko.com Authentication-Results: phobos.denx.de; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=trini@konsulko.com Received: by mail-qt1-x833.google.com with SMTP id h24so5449031qta.12 for ; Fri, 10 Feb 2023 04:41:31 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=konsulko.com; s=google; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=AwNaOKLQoDX/HEBcxYjr+9PCI1bCxBZYSBCiniAcwwQ=; b=KbUAMG1UsfDu7sMw8Xyt5w8eYbi7UG+s5Db5pmSTePhRUMjlJ/BKsQmQcT0qNAamKO 0sS4F3wgD4xmmuHyjSXMZSwo2ggN6WW+X0IvKlp5oJfBJYxPKiQsTfF9SeDuG2NLLz7k LahxsS/mQj0ySWjYP8JKqYT3F7aijNCNxlduk= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=AwNaOKLQoDX/HEBcxYjr+9PCI1bCxBZYSBCiniAcwwQ=; b=MBRISf1K5uNm72P6InPANGtWI0wvjXg8odpoxYzvbvg4uVzR3NosLNcy3g7Mq+4Yq3 tMRtHGFa7tW79n1EJPQaSFUVMLV0rh906LW421VVdb2Vaj0zxg+snYt2ykdFOPFH8CZT nIavjSM+3IWSvJ7zYF7KCTUnTLMeTM373doNuabLi53PC2q++8IwxQWHqfH2Eybcy01P UgmbeLSP+ie9ylZPCw44ke1ILESJNJVDTsB9d4RC35R8AX4qFV8rY4g7nJ/OMyrhFe1i uWU2kXz5tqncAg7iVujdgAfohyqvbRfhfHQaLvP8HHS6SoQnSX4MVxasTWI1ZJhp7Es+ lerA== X-Gm-Message-State: AO0yUKUSLQ4bBZHBZdsFNUgwS58I7EP0jaQ7pe0cY+yyezBWxTm16qdN G7Kyr19NphDVcqORC/ZyLvrgvw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AK7set81u1bfQHtJ9jG+HEyJWuWUWOTofXTwkyLsHeWEK846COgx4ZbwJDvxtvF4CfXPqSRp+ytAow== X-Received: by 2002:ac8:4e84:0:b0:3b9:bd28:bb6c with SMTP id 4-20020ac84e84000000b003b9bd28bb6cmr26056206qtp.36.1676032890272; Fri, 10 Feb 2023 04:41:30 -0800 (PST) Received: from bill-the-cat (2603-6081-7b00-6400-3812-7488-b449-9d25.res6.spectrum.com. [2603:6081:7b00:6400:3812:7488:b449:9d25]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id m28-20020aed27dc000000b003b635a5d56csm3342525qtg.30.2023.02.10.04.41.29 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Fri, 10 Feb 2023 04:41:29 -0800 (PST) Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2023 07:41:28 -0500 From: Tom Rini To: Eugen Hristev Cc: Simon Glass , U-Boot Mailing List Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 031/169] Correct SPL use of ATMEL_PIO4 Message-ID: References: <20230205223836.231657-1-sjg@chromium.org> <20230205223836.231657-32-sjg@chromium.org> <2b2c05a3-2886-e82b-af8f-6f75c84400b3@collabora.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="drFu4kAmMps//9G0" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <2b2c05a3-2886-e82b-af8f-6f75c84400b3@collabora.com> X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett X-BeenThere: u-boot@lists.denx.de X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39 Precedence: list List-Id: U-Boot discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: u-boot-bounces@lists.denx.de Sender: "U-Boot" X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.103.6 at phobos.denx.de X-Virus-Status: Clean --drFu4kAmMps//9G0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, Feb 10, 2023 at 09:25:22AM +0200, Eugen Hristev wrote: > On 2/9/23 19:36, Tom Rini wrote: > > On Sun, Feb 05, 2023 at 03:36:17PM -0700, Simon Glass wrote: > >=20 > > > This converts 1 usage of this option to the non-SPL form, since there= is > > > no SPL_ATMEL_PIO4 defined in Kconfig > > >=20 > > > Signed-off-by: Simon Glass > > > --- > > >=20 > > > (no changes since v1) > > >=20 > > > drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-at91-pio4.c | 2 +- > > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > >=20 > > > diff --git a/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-at91-pio4.c b/drivers/pinctrl/pi= nctrl-at91-pio4.c > > > index 50e3dd449ab..84b398619c4 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-at91-pio4.c > > > +++ b/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-at91-pio4.c > > > @@ -271,7 +271,7 @@ static int atmel_pinctrl_bind(struct udevice *dev) > > > ofnode node =3D dev_ofnode(dev); > > > struct atmel_pinctrl_data *priv =3D (struct atmel_pinctrl_data *)d= ev_get_driver_data(dev); > > > - if (!CONFIG_IS_ENABLED(ATMEL_PIO4)) > > > + if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_ATMEL_PIO4)) > > > return 0; > > > /* Obtain a handle to the GPIO driver */ > >=20 > > This grows SPL in a number of platforms, so adding in Eugen to see if we > > really do want to omit this here in SPL on platforms that otherwise set > > the symbol. > >=20 >=20 > Hi Simon, Tom, >=20 > The growth is because the compiler will now include in SPL all the code > below the check ? The respective code is not conditionally compiled, so I= am > trying to see why the growth. The solution would be to guard all the below > code in the function (or the whole bind itself) by #ifndef CONFIG_SPL_BUI= LD > ? Correct, Simon's change causes it to be included in SPL and not optimized out. My question is, are we intentionally omitting the code here, in that case? Or should we be including it in SPL and Simon's change of macro is correct. --=20 Tom --drFu4kAmMps//9G0 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQGzBAABCgAdFiEEGjx/cOCPqxcHgJu/FHw5/5Y0tywFAmPmO24ACgkQFHw5/5Y0 tyw9WQv+Id5QUXxtNyZ4aekXAVpOntXFkenWlzQ16r13LnmdGmWbPy7DzaOjHEYl Uqfie9bdfms82a2YMxC5Sot5ORJQsBtBEhSWnCzmnwcV1eac4xg5YQTa9w/pfbTn mTUDJOlZvUDnH0FbUS1et2t/JStfHDk3nN5teu8z0AkeWy/xi0PnSfgLbRYnjYTR JWmlnYylX1w5LxLB8ehXHEw8D4/N2okkUCS4//OeB2CIGL+FJUv/PzCrjKyhkTx/ MjMpM/qaZT99DC+iNT6/x2fMe03aeFCYtSP7AV4MogRXzuOsohU0cWFBaxh4GNeb q8PgvmfQYQENWs8SuSQ6Ra0oP6t0TC5JpxdiARi4iBYd2rjqiSU77sTUUZTQkS8U lFTzY8XsqNoJ8l7qbw35WCw7/gTb7AcGHdkunvBrFpwE4K0Gx5XNvhO0SDz0qYpP JY2CnlWyo/VxHF2qXxZMvixiOOu3YXe0PA4quFcQWi+aoSGIO9kSx0pgZ/2NcPbQ Q+ubGX4r =iUQ6 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --drFu4kAmMps//9G0--