On Tue, Dec 07, 2010 at 11:11:23PM +0100, Stefan Reinauer wrote: > * Stefan Reinauer <ste...@coreboot.org> [101207 23:06]: > > * Patrick Georgi <patr...@georgi-clan.de> [101207 16:35]: > > > Am 06.12.2010 23:45, schrieb Uwe Hermann: > > > > See patch. > > > src/cpu/Kconfig defines CACHE_AS_RAM to "!ROMCC", so I think these can > > > be dropped completely. Right? > > > > > > We basically assume it's CAR unless romcc is used. > > > > This seems to make a lot of sense. > > > > Do we need this stuff in Kconfig at all? > > There are only very few places in the Makefile that need the > distinction: > > ./src/arch/i386/Makefile.inc:ifeq ($(CONFIG_ROMCC),y) > ./src/arch/i386/Makefile.inc:ifeq ($(CONFIG_ROMCC),y) > ./src/pc80/Makefile.inc:romstage-$(CONFIG_CACHE_AS_RAM) += serial.c > ./src/console/Makefile.inc:romstage-$(CONFIG_CACHE_AS_RAM) += console.c > ./src/lib/Makefile.inc:romstage-$(CONFIG_CACHE_AS_RAM) += ramtest.c > > And some in the .c files, but I think it would be safe to replace those > #if CONFIG_CACHE_AS_RAM with #ifndef __ROMCC__
That would be pretty confusing IMHO, as sometimes "#ifndef __ROMCC__" is used even in CAR boards (where the bootblock is compiled with romcc AFAIK) in some header files (to "disable" function prototypes which romcc doesn't support). The __ROMCC__ #define would then serve two different purposes, kind of like before we splitted away __PRE_RAM__ from __ROMCC__. Uwe. -- http://hermann-uwe.de | http://sigrok.org http://randomprojects.org | http://unmaintained-free-software.org -- coreboot mailing list: coreboot@coreboot.org http://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot