Michael Ellerman <m...@ellerman.id.au> writes: > I'm going to be a total pain, and suggest that this is the wrong approach :) > > I was on board until patch 15, where you have to add an #ifdef SKIBOOT to > guard > an include, and you have to remove an include on the Linux side.
(the Linux include was actually not used it seems) > I think the better solution would be to pull all the common parts out into a > new file, opal-api.h. That file would define the API between Linux & Skiboot, > and absolutely nothing else. Sounds fine. > Both Linux and Skiboot would continue to have an opal.h, which would include > opal-api.h, and then anything else needed on either side to make a functioning > opal.h - eg. other includes & definitions (SG_ENTRIES_PER_NODE). > > It would also have the advantage that because opal-api.h is a new file, we can > get it synced from the beginning and not worry about all the whitespace & > rearranging patches. ie. there'd just be one patch on both sides to add the > new > file and move definitions into it from opal.h. Sure. I was doing it bit by bit just so that it was reviewable that I didn't miss anything or violently screw anything up. Plus, there were things that should be changed in skiboot as well. > If you don't violently disagree I'll do a patch for that and we can see how it > looks? Not violently :) I'd go back and do a similar thing to skiboot to make them match again though, having linux/opal-api.h match skiboot/opal.h would just cause swearing fits :) _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
