| Message ID | 20190529000247.11946-1-david@lechnology.com |
|---|---|
| State | Superseded |
| Delegated to: | Tom Rini |
| Headers | show |
| Series | [U-Boot] configs/legoev3: define CONFIG_SKIP_LOWLEVEL_INIT | expand |
On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 7:03 PM David Lechner <david@lechnology.com> wrote: > > This adds a define for CONFIG_SKIP_LOWLEVEL_INIT in the legoev3 config. > On the EV3, U-Boot is loaded into RAM by another bootloader, so we > don't need the lowlevel init in U-Boot. > > Signed-off-by: David Lechner <david@lechnology.com> > --- > include/configs/legoev3.h | 1 + > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) > > diff --git a/include/configs/legoev3.h b/include/configs/legoev3.h > index 1e239ecadd..36ca3b201e 100644 > --- a/include/configs/legoev3.h > +++ b/include/configs/legoev3.h > @@ -22,6 +22,7 @@ > #define CONFIG_SYS_OSCIN_FREQ 24000000 > #define CONFIG_SYS_TIMERBASE DAVINCI_TIMER0_BASE > #define CONFIG_SYS_HZ_CLOCK clk_get(DAVINCI_AUXCLK_CLKID) > +#define CONFIG_SKIP_LOWLEVEL_INIT If that's the case, does this mean that the NAK'd patch from Bartosz removing the dead code can be accepted? adam > > /* > * Memory Info > -- > 2.17.1 >
On 5/28/19 8:52 PM, Adam Ford wrote: > On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 7:03 PM David Lechner <david@lechnology.com> wrote: >> >> This adds a define for CONFIG_SKIP_LOWLEVEL_INIT in the legoev3 config. >> On the EV3, U-Boot is loaded into RAM by another bootloader, so we >> don't need the lowlevel init in U-Boot. >> >> Signed-off-by: David Lechner <david@lechnology.com> >> --- >> include/configs/legoev3.h | 1 + >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) >> >> diff --git a/include/configs/legoev3.h b/include/configs/legoev3.h >> index 1e239ecadd..36ca3b201e 100644 >> --- a/include/configs/legoev3.h >> +++ b/include/configs/legoev3.h >> @@ -22,6 +22,7 @@ >> #define CONFIG_SYS_OSCIN_FREQ 24000000 >> #define CONFIG_SYS_TIMERBASE DAVINCI_TIMER0_BASE >> #define CONFIG_SYS_HZ_CLOCK clk_get(DAVINCI_AUXCLK_CLKID) >> +#define CONFIG_SKIP_LOWLEVEL_INIT > > If that's the case, does this mean that the NAK'd patch from Bartosz > removing the dead code can be accepted? Probably
śr., 29 maj 2019 o 03:55 David Lechner <david@lechnology.com> napisał(a): > > On 5/28/19 8:52 PM, Adam Ford wrote: > > On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 7:03 PM David Lechner <david@lechnology.com> wrote: > >> > >> This adds a define for CONFIG_SKIP_LOWLEVEL_INIT in the legoev3 config. > >> On the EV3, U-Boot is loaded into RAM by another bootloader, so we > >> don't need the lowlevel init in U-Boot. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: David Lechner <david@lechnology.com> > >> --- > >> include/configs/legoev3.h | 1 + > >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) > >> > >> diff --git a/include/configs/legoev3.h b/include/configs/legoev3.h > >> index 1e239ecadd..36ca3b201e 100644 > >> --- a/include/configs/legoev3.h > >> +++ b/include/configs/legoev3.h > >> @@ -22,6 +22,7 @@ > >> #define CONFIG_SYS_OSCIN_FREQ 24000000 > >> #define CONFIG_SYS_TIMERBASE DAVINCI_TIMER0_BASE > >> #define CONFIG_SYS_HZ_CLOCK clk_get(DAVINCI_AUXCLK_CLKID) > >> +#define CONFIG_SKIP_LOWLEVEL_INIT > > > > If that's the case, does this mean that the NAK'd patch from Bartosz > > removing the dead code can be accepted? > > Probably I will resend the two patches in a single series to avoid confusion. Bart
diff --git a/include/configs/legoev3.h b/include/configs/legoev3.h index 1e239ecadd..36ca3b201e 100644 --- a/include/configs/legoev3.h +++ b/include/configs/legoev3.h @@ -22,6 +22,7 @@ #define CONFIG_SYS_OSCIN_FREQ 24000000 #define CONFIG_SYS_TIMERBASE DAVINCI_TIMER0_BASE #define CONFIG_SYS_HZ_CLOCK clk_get(DAVINCI_AUXCLK_CLKID) +#define CONFIG_SKIP_LOWLEVEL_INIT /* * Memory Info
This adds a define for CONFIG_SKIP_LOWLEVEL_INIT in the legoev3 config. On the EV3, U-Boot is loaded into RAM by another bootloader, so we don't need the lowlevel init in U-Boot. Signed-off-by: David Lechner <david@lechnology.com> --- include/configs/legoev3.h | 1 + 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)