Hi Eric,
On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 3:56 PM, Eric Nelson
<eric.nel...@boundarydevices.com> wrote:
> In the RFC e-mail change regarding README.imx6-something,
> I proposed that we replace the pad declaration form
> currently in use:
>
> enum {
> MX6_PAD_SD3_DAT2__USDHC3_DAT2 = IOMUX_PAD(...)
> };
>
> with macros of this form so that they can be pre-pended
> with MX6Q_ and MX6DL_ when we need both in an image
> (SPL?) that can run on either variant of processor.
>
> MX6_PAD_DECL(SD3_DAT2__USDHC3_DAT2, ...)
I thinks this macro approach should work fine. Do we see any objections?
>
> If we do this, then lining up the columns based on the
> first form doesn't make much sense.
Understood it now. Thanks for clarifying.
Regards,
Fabio Estevam
_______________________________________________
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
