[GitHub] [incubator-nuttx] tito97sp commented on a diff in pull request #7400: board/stm32h7: Fix CONFIG_LIB_BOARDCTL build cap in stm32_boot.c

[GitBox <gi...@apache.org>]

tito97sp commented on code in PR #7400:
URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator-nuttx/pull/7400#discussion_r1002766985


##########
boards/arm/stm32h7/nucleo-h743zi/src/stm32_boot.c:
##########
@@ -86,7 +86,7 @@ void stm32_boardinitialize(void)
 #ifdef CONFIG_BOARD_LATE_INITIALIZE
 void board_late_initialize(void)
 {
-#if defined(CONFIG_NSH_LIBRARY) && !defined(CONFIG_BOARDCTL)
+#if defined(CONFIG_NSH_LIBRARY) && !defined(CONFIG_LIB_BOARDCTL)

Review Comment:
   Hi @pkarashchenko, what do you propose in this case? 
   
   I see that there exists other boards does not check neither `CONFIG_NSH_LIBRARY` nor `CONFIG_BOARDCTL` for intializing the board and other that checks both. 
   
   * nuttx/boards/arm/samv7/samv71-xult/src/sam_boot.c
   * nuttx/boards/arm/stm32/nucleo-f303ze/src/stm32_boot.c
   
   In my case I have defined `CONFIG_NSH_LIBRARY` and also `CONFIG_BOARDCTL` so the `stm32_bringup()` function is never reachable.
   
   Why `CONFIG_BOARDCTL` must not be defined in order to perform a board_late_initialization?
   
   I am confused about the difference between `CONFIG_BOARDCTL` and `CONFIG_LIB_BOARDCTL`



-- 
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: commits-unsubscribe@nuttx.apache.org

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org