Hi Graeme, On 04/16/2013 03:35 PM, Graeme Russ wrote: > Hi Andreas, > > On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 11:32 PM, Andreas Bießmann > <andreas.de...@googlemail.com <mailto:andreas.de...@googlemail.com>> wrote: >> >> Dear Wolfgang, >> >> On 04/16/2013 03:05 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote: >> > Dear Andreas, >> > >> > In message <516d4b00.9030...@gmail.com > <mailto:516d4b00.9030...@gmail.com>> you wrote:
<snip> > I think that ultimately there should only be a single hang() function Ok. >> > Note that hang() is not supposed to do anything else, it just hangs >> > the system. If you have a debugger attached, you will be able to do a >> > simple stack backtrace and see exactly where you are hanging, and why. >> >> Well, for this specific board I plan to panic() on wrong hardware >> detection (which will in turn call hang()). My requirements say that I >> have to visualize this state then, I thought it would be a good idea to >> blink some lights in the endless loop in hang() for this specific board. >> >> > If you think you need to have specialized code, you are doing >> > something wrong. >> >> Really? How would you solve this requirement? > > Doesn't it make sense to use panic()? In my opinion it makes sense to panic(). In my special case I also need to hang() when panic(). The next question is then how to visualize the (end-)user of that device that we hang(). Best regards Andreas Bießmann _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
