Dear Wolfgang, On Friday 08 July 2011 05:55 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote: > Dear Daniel Schwierzeck, > > In > message<CACUy__VhV1_eXGW1NuSgLEB1nyVJ51xUXa0vwbY3Tdb=kvm...@mail.gmail.com> > you wrote: >> >>>> +# Allow compiling of C and ASM code parts in different way. >>>> +# Serves also as a replacement for CONFIG_PRELOADER. >>>> +ifneq ($(CONFIG_UBOOT_SPL_BUILD),) >>>> +CPPFLAGS += -DCONFIG_UBOOT_SPL_BUILD >>>> +endif >>> >>> I don't understand this comment. >> >> Currently we have CONFIG_PRELOADER (and maybe others?) to conditionally >> compile start.S and other code. The idea here is to consolidate those defines >> and to use a common name convention for SPL. My suggestion is something >> like CONFIG_UBOOT_SPL_BUILD. Are there better ideas? > > No, I agree with you. I just don't understand the comment above, i. e. > in which way does this "allow compiling of C and ASM code parts in > different way"? CPPFLAGS applies the same to .c and .S files, and I > don't see a how this setting would cause different options to be used > for C versus assembler code.
Do you confirm on replacing all instances of CONFIG_PRELOADER with CONFIG_UBOOT_SPL_BUILD? best regards, Aneesh _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot