summaryrefslogtreecommitdiffstats
path: root/scripts/Makefile.uncmd_spl
Commit message (Collapse)AuthorAgeFilesLines
* dm: gpio: Allow control of GPIO uclass in SPLSimon Glass2019-12-151-1/+0
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | At present if CONFIG_SPL_GPIO_SUPPORT is enabled then the GPIO uclass is included in SPL/TPL without any control for boards. Some boards may want to disable this to reduce code size where GPIOs are not needed in SPL or TPL. Add a new Kconfig option to permit this. Default it to 'y' so that existing boards work correctly. Change existing uses of CONFIG_DM_GPIO to CONFIG_IS_ENABLED(DM_GPIO) to preserve the current behaviour. Also update the 74x164 GPIO driver since it cannot build with SPL. This allows us to remove the hacks in config_uncmd_spl.h and Makefile.uncmd_spl (eventually those files should be removed). Signed-off-by: Simon Glass <sjg@chromium.org> Reviewed-by: Bin Meng <bmeng.cn@gmail.com>
* SPDX: Convert all of our single license tags to Linux Kernel styleTom Rini2018-05-071-3/+1
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | When U-Boot started using SPDX tags we were among the early adopters and there weren't a lot of other examples to borrow from. So we picked the area of the file that usually had a full license text and replaced it with an appropriate SPDX-License-Identifier: entry. Since then, the Linux Kernel has adopted SPDX tags and they place it as the very first line in a file (except where shebangs are used, then it's second line) and with slightly different comment styles than us. In part due to community overlap, in part due to better tag visibility and in part for other minor reasons, switch over to that style. This commit changes all instances where we have a single declared license in the tag as both the before and after are identical in tag contents. There's also a few places where I found we did not have a tag and have introduced one. Signed-off-by: Tom Rini <trini@konsulko.com>
* scripts: spl: fix typoPeng Fan2017-12-041-1/+1
| | | | | | | | | Typo fix: CONIFG->CONFIG Signed-off-by: Peng Fan <peng.fan@nxp.com> Cc: Tom Rini <trini@konsulko.com> Cc: Simon Glass <sjg@chromium.org> Reviewed-by: Simon Glass <sjg@chromium.org>
* scripts/Makefile* Add SPDX-License-Identifier tagTom Rini2016-01-191-0/+2
| | | | | | | A general best practice for SPDX is that Makefiles should have an identifier, add these as everything else is currently covered. Signed-off-by: Tom Rini <trini@konsulko.com>
* of: clean up OF_CONTROL ifdef conditionalsMasahiro Yamada2015-08-181-3/+0
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | We have flipped CONFIG_SPL_DISABLE_OF_CONTROL. We have cleansing devices, $(SPL_) and CONFIG_IS_ENABLED(), so we are ready to clear away the ugly logic in include/fdtdec.h: #ifdef CONFIG_OF_CONTROL # if defined(CONFIG_SPL_BUILD) && !defined(SPL_OF_CONTROL) # define OF_CONTROL 0 # else # define OF_CONTROL 1 # endif #else # define OF_CONTROL 0 #endif Now CONFIG_IS_ENABLED(OF_CONTROL) is the substitute. It refers to CONFIG_OF_CONTROL for U-boot proper and CONFIG_SPL_OF_CONTROL for SPL. Also, we no longer have to cancel CONFIG_OF_CONTROL in include/config_uncmd_spl.h and scripts/Makefile.spl. Signed-off-by: Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com> Reviewed-by: Tom Rini <trini@konsulko.com> Reviewed-by: Simon Glass <sjg@chromium.org> Acked-by: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>
* of: flip CONFIG_SPL_DISABLE_OF_CONTROL into CONFIG_SPL_OF_CONTROLMasahiro Yamada2015-08-181-1/+1
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | As we discussed a couple of times, negative CONFIG options make our life difficult; CONFIG_SYS_NO_FLASH, CONFIG_SYS_DCACHE_OFF, ... and here is another one. Now, there are three boards enabling OF_CONTROL on SPL: - socfpga_arria5_defconfig - socfpga_cyclone5_defconfig - socfpga_socrates_defconfig This commit adds CONFIG_SPL_OF_CONTROL for them and deletes CONFIG_SPL_DISABLE_OF_CONTROL from the other boards to invert the logic. Signed-off-by: Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com> Reviewed-by: Tom Rini <trini@konsulko.com> Reviewed-by: Simon Glass <sjg@chromium.org>
* dm: drop CONFIG_DM_DEVICE_REMOVE from uncmd listMasahiro Yamada2015-08-181-2/+0
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | We do not want to compile the DM remove code for SPL. Currently, we undef it in include/config_uncmd_spl.h (for C files) and in scripts/Makefile.uncmd_spl (for Makefiles). This is really ugly. This commit demonstrates how we can deprecate those two files. Use $(SPL_) for the entry in the Makfile and CONFIG_IS_ENABLED() in C files. Signed-off-by: Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com> Reviewed-by: Tom Rini <trini@konsulko.com> Reviewed-by: Simon Glass <sjg@chromium.org>
* Remove SPL undefine of CONFIG_OF_CONTROLSimon Glass2015-06-101-0/+2
| | | | | | | Allow SPL to be built with this option so that we can support device tree control. Disable the simple bus for now in SPL. It may be needed later. Signed-off-by: Simon Glass <sjg@chromium.org>
* kconfig: remove unneeded dependency on !SPL_BUILDMasahiro Yamada2015-02-241-0/+2
| | | | | | | Now CONFIG_SPL_BUILD is not defined in Kconfig, so "!depends on SPL_BUILD" and "if !SPL_BUILD" are redundant. Signed-off-by: Masahiro Yamada <yamada.m@jp.panasonic.com>
* kconfig: switch to single .config configurationMasahiro Yamada2015-02-241-0/+16
When Kconfig for U-boot was examined, one of the biggest issues was how to support multiple images (Normal, SPL, TPL). There were actually two options, "single .config" and "multiple .config". After some discussions and thought experiments, I chose the latter, i.e. to create ".config", "spl/.config", "tpl/.config" for Normal, SPL, TPL, respectively. It is true that the "multiple .config" strategy provided us the maximum flexibility and helped to avoid duplicating CONFIGs among Normal, SPL, TPL, but I have noticed some fatal problems: [1] It is impossible to share CONFIG options across the images. If you change the configuration of Main image, you often have to adjust some SPL configurations correspondingly. Currently, we cannot handle the dependencies between them. It means one of the biggest advantages of Kconfig is lost. [2] It is too painful to change both ".config" and "spl/.config". Sunxi guys started to work around this problem by creating a new configuration target. Commit cbdd9a9737cc (sunxi: kconfig: Add %_felconfig rule to enable FEL build of sunxi platforms.) added "make *_felconfig" to enable CONFIG_SPL_FEL on both images. Changing the configuration of multiple images in one command is a generic demand. The current implementation cannot propose any good solution about this. [3] Kconfig files are getting ugly and difficult to understand. Commit b724bd7d6349 (dm: Kconfig: Move CONFIG_SYS_MALLOC_F_LEN to Kconfig) has sprinkled "if !SPL_BUILD" over the Kconfig files. [4] The build system got more complicated than it should be. To adjust Linux-originated Kconfig to U-Boot, the helper script "scripts/multiconfig.sh" was introduced. Writing a complicated text processor is a shell script sometimes caused problems. Now I believe the "single .config" will serve us better. With it, all the problems above would go away. Instead, we will have to add some CONFIG_SPL_* (and CONFIG_TPL_*) options such as CONFIG_SPL_DM, but we will not have much. Anyway, this is what we do now in scripts/Makefile.spl. I admit my mistake with my apology and this commit switches to the single .config configuration. It is not so difficult to do that: - Remove unnecessary processings from scripts/multiconfig.sh This file will remain for a while to support the current defconfig format. It will be removed after more cleanups are done. - Adjust some makefiles and Kconfigs - Add some entries to include/config_uncmd_spl.h and the new file scripts/Makefile.uncmd_spl. Some CONFIG options that are not supported on SPL must be disabled because one .config is shared between SPL and U-Boot proper going forward. I know this is not a beautiful solution and I think we can do better, but let's see how much we will have to describe them. - update doc/README.kconfig More cleaning up patches will follow this. Signed-off-by: Masahiro Yamada <yamada.m@jp.panasonic.com> Reviewed-by: Simon Glass <sjg@chromium.org>