On Mon, 11 Mar 2013 17:53:37 -0700 Simon Glass <s...@chromium.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 5:44 PM, Kim Phillips > <kim.phill...@freescale.com>wrote: > > On Thu, 7 Mar 2013 19:11:16 -0800 > > Simon Glass <s...@chromium.org> wrote: > > > OK so let's look at adding the hash_register() idea. But not in this > > > series. That should come later in a revision of the hash.c > > > infrastructure, since it needs to adjust sha1, sha255 and crc32. > > > > I don't understand: why not s/ace/hw/g in common/ and include/ on > > this patchseries, then move straight to the device model at some > > later point? It's a compromise, but it works fine for the time > > being - other vendors can add their hash support without having to > > touch common code, code size is not affected, etc. > > Fine with me. The effect is the same - this is just a rename. Should not be > done in the ace.h file though, only in the naming of the functions called > from hash.c, right? the ace_sha_hash_digest() declaration should be removed from ace_sha.h (it's only needed by the driver, which is ok without it being there). ACE_SHA_TYPE_SHA* definitions belong in the driver too - they're ACE h/w-specific. Rename the filename ace_sha.h to hw_sha.h, and all remaining ACE references contained in it. If the 'hw_' nomenclature is undesired, other possibilities are 'accel_', 'hw_accel_', 'alt_'... Kim _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
