On Mon, 24 Nov 2008 10:53:46 +1100
"Graeme Russ" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 10:47 AM, Wolfgang Denk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Linux/Documentation/
>
> Hmmm, thats a big mouthful to chew for such a small bootloader
I believe he meant linux/Documentation/CodingSty
Dear Jean-Christophe,
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
>
>>Convert readl/writel to base + offset style. Replace hardcoded values with
>>macros.
It would be quite nice if you could apply this patch to
u-boot-arm/omap3 branch independent of read/write discussion. As this
is the last c
Dear Graeme,
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
>
> > The only clean and portable and thus reliable way is to use the (CPU
> > specific) accessor macros or functions.
>
> Will do :)
thanks.
> It seems to me that more and more of these 'style' issues are
> cropping up. Should there be a
On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 10:47 AM, Wolfgang Denk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Linux/Documentation/
Hmmm, thats a big mouthful to chew for such a small bootloader
Maybe we could start to pick out particular specific pieces that
apply directly to the U-Boot source?
> architecture does that in a s
Wolfgang,
On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 10:04 AM, Wolfgang Denk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Dear Graeme,
>
> in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
>>
>> Do you mean to instance the ecc_control struct at a specific memory
>> location and use writel(0x000, &ptr->ecc_config);? If so, why not
>
> Yes -
Dear Graeme,
in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
>
> Do you mean to instance the ecc_control struct at a specific memory
> location and use writel(0x000, &ptr->ecc_config);? If so, why not
Yes - this, and all other blocks of registers.
> simply use ptr->ecc_config = 0x?
Because in gen
On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 6:47 AM, Wolfgang Denk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Dear Dirk,
>
> you should really use structures like this:
>
>struct ecc_control {
>u32 ecc_config;
>u32 ecc_control;
>u32 ecc_size_config;
>u32 ecc1_
Dear Dirk,
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
>
> > I think repeating the sequence "base + offset(foo)" again and again
> > is not exactly nice or easy to read.
...
> >>- writel((a_add_high | a_add_low), SDRC_CS_CFG);
> >>+ writel((a_add_high | a_add_low), sdrc_base + OFFS(SDRC_CS_CF
Dear Wolfgang,
Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear Dirk,
>
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
>
>>Convert readl/writel to base + offset style. Replace hardcoded values with
>>macros.
>
>
> I think repeating the sequence "base + offset(foo)" again and again
> is not exactly nice or easy to r
Dear Dirk,
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
> Convert readl/writel to base + offset style. Replace hardcoded values with
> macros.
I think repeating the sequence "base + offset(foo)" again and again
is not exactly nice or easy to read.
> - writel((a_add_high | a_add_low), SDRC_CS_
Convert readl/writel to base + offset style. Replace hardcoded values with
macros.
No functional change.
Signed-off-by: Dirk Behme <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
cpu/arm_cortexa8/omap3/board.c | 56 ---
cpu/arm_cortexa8/omap3/clock.c | 47 -
cpu/arm_cortexa8/omap3
11 matches
Mail list logo
