On Saturday, October 22, 2011 02:41:54 AM Albert ARIBAUD wrote: > Le 22/10/2011 02:19, Marek Vasut a écrit : > > On Saturday, October 22, 2011 02:04:52 AM Tom Rini wrote: > >> On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 4:45 PM, Marek Vasut<marek.va...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> On Saturday, October 22, 2011 01:08:43 AM Albert ARIBAUD wrote: > >>>> Le 22/10/2011 00:46, Marek Vasut a écrit : > >>>>> On Saturday, October 22, 2011 12:44:06 AM Albert ARIBAUD wrote: > >>>>>> Le 22/10/2011 00:00, Marek Vasut a écrit : > >>>>>>> On Friday, October 21, 2011 11:52:23 PM Albert ARIBAUD wrote: > >>>>>>>> Hi Marek, > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Le 21/10/2011 22:44, Marek Vasut a écrit : > >>>>>>>>> On Thursday, October 06, 2011 02:13:26 AM Marek Vasut wrote: > >>>>>>>>>> This allows the SPL to avoid compiling in the CPU support code. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Marek Vasut<marek.va...@gmail.com> > >>>>>>>>>> Cc: Stefano Babic<sba...@denx.de> > >>>>>>>>>> Cc: Wolfgang Denk<w...@denx.de> > >>>>>>>>>> Cc: Detlev Zundel<d...@denx.de> > >>>>>>>>>> Cc: Scott Wood<scottw...@freescale.com> > >>>>>>>>>> --- > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/Makefile | 7 +++++++ > >>>>>>>>>> 1 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> diff --git a/arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/Makefile > >>>>>>>>>> b/arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/Makefile index 930e0d1..3f9b0f1 100644 > >>>>>>>>>> --- a/arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/Makefile > >>>>>>>>>> +++ b/arch/arm/cpu/arm926ejs/Makefile > >>>>>>>>>> @@ -28,6 +28,13 @@ LIB = $(obj)lib$(CPU).o > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> START = start.o > >>>>>>>>>> COBJS = cpu.o > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> +ifdef CONFIG_SPL_BUILD > >>>>>>>>>> +ifdef CONFIG_SPL_NO_CPU_SUPPORT_CODE > >>>>>>>>>> +START := > >>>>>>>>>> +COBJS := > >>>>>>>>>> +endif > >>>>>>>>>> +endif > >>>>>>>>>> + > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> SRCS := $(START:.o=.S) $(SOBJS:.o=.S) $(COBJS:.o=.c) > >>>>>>>>>> OBJS := $(addprefix $(obj),$(COBJS) $(SOBJS)) > >>>>>>>>>> START := $(addprefix $(obj),$(START)) > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Hi Albert, > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> can we get this applied please? > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> I still don't understand what this is supposed to do -- why not > >>>>>>>> linking this code is required. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Amicalement, > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Hi Albert, > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> I use very different start.S in SPL. And I don't need cpu.o at all. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> That I understand; but is there a /problem/ in linking cpu.o in? > >>>>> > >>>>> I suppose it'll be optimized out at link time ? > >>>> > >>>> That indirectly answers my question: what you want to achieve is > >>>> removing dead code. > >>> > >>> The code IS USED in U-Boot, but IS NOT USED in SPL ! > >> > >> Right, but linked and unused code in SPL is (or should be!) thrown > >> away, is what's > >> trying to be driven home right now. If the file is going to go away, > >> and it's compiled > >> thrown away at final link of SPL, lets just ignore that it exists for > >> a little longer, and > >> then it won't. > > > > My distrust towards compiler abilities to optimize such stuff out tells > > me it's better to avoid it even to be compiled in at all. > > Optimizing unused functions is a rather simple and reliable ability in > tolchains. The issue is not really whether the toolchain is able to do > the removal (it is); rather, the issue is whether the linker command > line will cause the removal (it will IMO as long as -gc-sections is > specified). > > Amicalement,
So what you suggest is to leave cpu.o compiling and drop only start.S ? Cheers _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
