Hi, > -----Original Message----- > From: Eugen Hristev <eugen.hris...@collabora.com> > Sent: Monday, August 28, 2023 5:47 PM > To: Chanho Park <chanho61.p...@samsung.com>; 'Michal Simek' > <michal.si...@amd.com>; u-boot@lists.denx.de > Cc: Simon Glass <s...@chromium.org> > Subject: Re: [PATCH] fpga: define dummy fpga_load function for debug build > > On 8/28/23 03:21, Chanho Park wrote: > > Hi, > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Michal Simek <michal.si...@amd.com> > >> Sent: Friday, August 25, 2023 4:23 PM > >> To: Chanho Park <chanho61.p...@samsung.com>; u-boot@lists.denx.de > >> Subject: Re: [PATCH] fpga: define dummy fpga_load function for debug > >> build > >> > >> Hi, > >> > >> On 8/16/23 08:54, Chanho Park wrote: > >>> This fixes below build error when CC_OPTIMIZE_FOR_DEBUG is enabled > >>> and CONFIG_SPL_FPGA is not enabled. > >>> > >>> ../common/spl/spl_fit.c:591: undefined reference to `fpga_load' > >>> collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status > >>> > >>> Signed-off-by: Chanho Park <chanho61.p...@samsung.com> > >>> --- > >>> include/fpga.h | 8 ++++++++ > >>> 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+) > >>> > >>> diff --git a/include/fpga.h b/include/fpga.h index > >>> ed688cc0fa3b..44f2755a3f10 100644 > >>> --- a/include/fpga.h > >>> +++ b/include/fpga.h > >>> @@ -60,8 +60,16 @@ int fpga_add(fpga_type devtype, void *desc); > >>> int fpga_count(void); > >>> const fpga_desc *const fpga_get_desc(int devnum); > >>> int fpga_is_partial_data(int devnum, size_t img_len); > >>> +#if CONFIG_IS_ENABLED(FPGA) > >>> int fpga_load(int devnum, const void *buf, size_t bsize, > >>> bitstream_type bstype, int flags); > >>> +#else > >>> +static inline int fpga_load(int devnum, const void *buf, size_t bsize, > >>> + bitstream_type bstype, int flags) { > >>> + return FPGA_FAIL; > >>> +} > >>> +#endif > >>> int fpga_fsload(int devnum, const void *buf, size_t size, > >>> fpga_fs_info *fpga_fsinfo); > >>> int fpga_loads(int devnum, const void *buf, size_t size, > >> > >> There is another patch targeting the same code. > >> Please take a look at > >> https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230808102227.34233-1- > >> eugen.hris...@collabora.com > > > > I wasn't aware that there was an attempt to fix the issue. If I knew it, > I would reply the patch... > > > >> > >> and work together to come up with the patch which covers both cases. > > > > Yes. I also tried to make the patch with CONFIG_CC_OPTIMIZE_FOR_DEBUG > guard but I couldn't find any codes that uses the guard. > > And I was also worried about the CC_OPTIMIZE_FOR_DEBUG's behavior. It > could be related with the optimization level of the compiler. > > That's why I put the guard with #if CONFIG_IS_ENABLED(FPGA). > > > > Best Regards, > > Chanho Park > > > > > Hi Chanho, > > Simon suggested to use CONFIG_CC_OPTIMIZE_FOR_DEBUG in this case here: > > https://protect2.fireeye.com/v1/url?k=a911b2cb-c86a1843-a9103984- > 74fe4860018a-146c33e2b586dc8a&q=1&e=e288ab48-75e8-400b-91c9- > e8bd95520918&u=https%3A%2F%2Fpatchwork.ozlabs.org%2Fproject%2Fuboot%2Fpatc > h%2F20230619102839.277902-1-eugen.hristev%40collabora.com%2F > > As I told Michal, basically your patch and my patch do the same thing. > I suggested him to pick the one that he thinks it's best. (or even suggest > another way)
I agree. Either way, I'm fine with it. Best Regards, Chanho Park