On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 9:18 AM, Stefano Babic <sba...@denx.de> wrote: > On 16/12/2011 16:59, Tom Rini wrote: >> On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 8:37 AM, Stefano Babic <sba...@denx.de> wrote: >>> The SPL is developped first for TI-OMAPx. The patch >>> move OMAP specific function into OMAP directory. >> >> I wonder if we should fold this into the mv'ing patch as well. > > I can squash the two patches, but I thought the review is easier as I > did. The previous patch shows clearly that the patch was only moved, and > the changes in Makefile makes possible to build the boards making the > patch bisectable. This patch then
Yeah, I guess that works too then, nevermind. >> [snip] >>> diff --git a/include/spl.h b/include/spl.h >>> +/* Boot type */ >>> +#define MMCSD_MODE_UNDEFINED 0 >> >> Not your bad spacing of course, but please fix. > > Thanks to have found, I will fix it. > >> >>> +/* NAND SPL functions */ >>> +void spl_nand_load_image(void); >>> +void spl_arch_nand_init(void); >>> + >>> +/* MMC SPL functions */ >>> +void spl_mmc_load_image(void); >> >> These should be covered by #ifdef CONFIG_SPL_(NAND||MMC)_SUPPORT > > Do we need in the header file for the prototypes ? We have never done, > and it should be not necessary. I would swear there's other examples like this (and someone brought this to my attention when i first posted spl_board_init internally). -- Tom _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot