On Tue, Aug 19, 2008 at 08:40:27PM -0400, Jerry Van Baren wrote:
> Hello all, I have a Request For Advice.
>
> I've pulled down the dtc/libfdt updates and applied them to my personal
> working git repository. It turns out that David Gibson added a use of
> the typedef "uintptr_t" found in linux-land in /usr/include/stdint.h.
>
> <http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.ports.ppc64.devel/43379>
>
> The problem is, currently u-boot doesn't have stdint.h. It looks like
> we have three options:
> 1) Hack in the typedef for uintptr_t into "libfdt_env.h"
This doesn't strike me as a hack. It's exactly the sort of thing that
libfdt_env.h is for. In fact, I think I already did this when I
updated the in-kernel dtc/libfdt to a recent version (the kernel has a
stdint.h, but the bootwrapper environment doesn't, or not a complete
one).
> 2) Add the linux stdint.h to u-boot
Doesn't have to be the Linux one, though that's probably easy as any.
Any more-or-less C99ish stdint.h will do.
> 3) Find an alternative for uintptr_t and convince David and Jon that it
> is A Better Thing to use.
>
> As I see it, #3 is extremely unlikely, especially since David is using
> uintptr_t for exactly the purpose for which it was created. #1 is,
> well, a hack. #2 (add linux' stdint.h to u-boot) seems like the best
> approach, but my initial try caused redefinitions between stdint.h and
> types.h as well as missing files:
> #include <features.h>
> #include <bits/wchar.h>
> #include <bits/wordsize.h>
> Sigh.
>
> At this point, adding stdint.h seems to be the best option. Anybody
> have a better approach?
>
> Thanks,
> gvb
>
--
David Gibson | I'll have my music baroque, and my code
david AT gibson.dropbear.id.au | minimalist, thank you. NOT _the_ _other_
| _way_ _around_!
http://www.ozlabs.org/~dgibson
_______________________________________________
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
