On Wed, Aug 11, 2021 at 04:14:51PM -0400, Sean Anderson wrote: > > > On 8/11/21 10:17 AM, Tom Rini wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 11, 2021 at 08:03:00AM -0600, Simon Glass wrote: > > > Hi Tom, > > > > > > On Wed, 11 Aug 2021 at 07:47, Tom Rini <tr...@konsulko.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Wed, Aug 11, 2021 at 06:56:31AM -0600, Simon Glass wrote: > > > > > Hi Tom, > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, 10 Aug 2021 at 13:38, Tom Rini <tr...@konsulko.com> wrote: > > > > [snip] > > > > > > I need to take another pass at converting a bunch of symbols, to see > > > > > > where we're at. Probably the biggest chunk of progress next would > > > > > > be to > > > > > > start converting CONFIG_SYS_xxx to SYS_xxx and moving defines out of > > > > > > config.h and in to something else. I'm taking a peek at some of the > > > > > > remaining PCI ones now. > > > > > > > > > > How about we set a deadline for this? It has gone on for too long and > > > > > we just need to drop these CONFIGs. It's probably a higher priority > > > > > than a Kconfig change. > > > > > > > > > > I was expecting that the config.h files would go away and we would use > > > > > Kconfig (or DT) for everything. What sort of things don't fit into > > > > > that model? > > > > > > > > Environment is the hard one to move out from config.h and in to, well, I > > > > > > Well you know my views on that :-) > > > > > > http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/uboot/patch/1382763695-2849-4-git-send-email-...@chromium.org/ > > > > > > I still think it makes more sense than #defines and I can resurrect > > > that series if you like. > > This would be nice. I was thinking about doing something like this for > LIL, to make writing tests easier.
I was thinking of mentioning LIL, even, here. Converting (to start with, just a board or two) that implement distro boot from the current env scheme to another env scheme is going to go quite a ways to showing if the proposed idea is going to be workable enough or not. > > That might work, yeah. I just also want to focus on less things in > > progress at once. That too I think has been part of why everything is > > taking so long. > > > > > > don't know what. I think there's also a handful of symbols like > > > > CONFIG_SPL_MAX_SIZE that are a little tricky to convert directly (they > > > > do math based on other symbols) rather than just as evaluate-and-set. > > > > > > We can either evaluate them and put the answer in as the defconfig > > > value...or perhaps ask Masahiro to support evaluation in kconfig?! > > > > I do forget what kind of operations are allowed in Kconfig at this > > point, it might be possible now, yes. And if not, something worth > > trying. > > At the moment there are conditionals for dependencies and defaults [1]. > It doesn't seem like too much of a stretch to allow for arbitrary > arithmetic. In particular, we could really get 80% of the functionality > with just + (and perhaps & or |). > > https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/kbuild/kconfig-language.html#menu-dependencies Yeah, the addition of +- I think really would cover everything that's not "this doesn't belong in CONFIG space really" I think. The only maybe-hangups are that we say for example on TI platforms: #define CONFIG_SPL_MAX_SIZE (SRAM_SCRATCH_SPACE_ADDR - CONFIG_SPL_TEXT_BASE) where SRAM_SCRATCH_SPACE_ADDR isn't a CONFIG symbol, on purpose. But in turn, maybe that means we just want to re-think the symbol and have a choice instead. Some platforms end up being "automatic" size like the above. Other platforms like imx* might be "fixed" size and then define 0x10000 or whatever. It's all the kind of details that come up when picking a symbol and digging in. -- Tom
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature