On 08/16/2012 01:01 AM, Stefano Babic wrote:
> On 15/08/2012 23:30, Tom Rini wrote:
>> We can only attempt to setup a malloc pool if
>> CONFIG_SYS_SPL_MALLOC_START is defined, and not all boards require it.
>> Make the call depend on the define.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Tom Rini <tr...@ti.com>
>> ---
>> arch/arm/lib/spl.c | 2 ++
>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm/lib/spl.c b/arch/arm/lib/spl.c
>> index 4d33f99..71a467e 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm/lib/spl.c
>> +++ b/arch/arm/lib/spl.c
>> @@ -149,8 +149,10 @@ void board_init_r(gd_t *id, ulong dummy)
>> u32 boot_device;
>> debug(">>spl:board_init_r()\n");
>>
>> +#ifdef CONFIG_SYS_SPL_MALLOC_START
>> mem_malloc_init(CONFIG_SYS_SPL_MALLOC_START,
>> CONFIG_SYS_SPL_MALLOC_SIZE);
>> +#endif
>>
>> #ifdef CONFIG_SPL_BOARD_INIT
>> spl_board_init();
>>
>
> Agree, mem_malloc_init should be not always called. However, how are the
> dependencies with other SPL configuration ? I think (but I can be wrong)
> that we need it if CONFIG_SPL_LIBDISK_SUPPORT or CONFIG_SPL_FAT_SUPPORT
> are set. Should we add them to your #ifdef case ?
I think until we have Kconfig-style dependencies available, there's
going to be a certain amount of pain here. We should probably add to
docs/README.SPL that SPL_FAT_SUPPORT depends on the malloc pool and the
defines that calls for (since there's a few of them not referenced right
were we call mem_malloc_init).
--
Tom
_______________________________________________
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
