On 10/07/2013 03:03 PM, Kim Phillips wrote: > On Mon, 30 Sep 2013 17:04:33 -0700 > York Sun <york...@freescale.com> wrote: > >> Kim, et al., >> >> I know I have asked this before. Pardon me as I don't consider myself a >> savy programmer. >> >> I am cleaning up the DDR driver for mpc83xx, mpc85xx and mpc86xx. The >> question is the accetable formats of declaring and initializing variable >> at the same time. The variables are the ccsr register pointers. I have >> two formats here >> >> struct ccsr_ddr __iomem *ddr = (void *) CONFIG_FOO_ADDR; >> struct ccsr_ddr __iomem *ddr = >> (struct ccsr_ddr __iomem *) CONFIG_FOO_ADDR; >> >> You have told me the second format is preferred. I have been using this >> format since. But in practice, the second format is often too long and I >> have to wrap to next line. It's not a problem for new code. As I am >> trying to cleanup the existing code, I would have to make more changes. >> So I am back to this question. Is the first format (using void *) >> accetable in long term? > > you're not running sparse, are you? :) > > Use 'make C=1' or 'MAKEALL -C' when building u-boot. >
I see what you mean. We have so many issue with existing code. Is it practical to enforce? York _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
