On Mon, May 04, 2009 at 05:40:37PM +0200, Detlev Zundel wrote: > >> static unsigned int serial_in(struct uart_8250_port *up, int offset) > > [snip] > >> } > >> > >> to be "simpler and more solid" readb(struct->field) (which is > >> effectively what we have in the current implementation)? You consider > >> "more configurable" to be a good in its own?
That's not "configuration", that's "separation of concerns". Why hardcode the bus mapping in code that only cares about the higher level register interface? > > Yes. > > Wow. As a rhetorical question - where do you actually draw the line if > you consider configurable to be a good in its own? Shouldn't we then > have configuration options for UARTs who are attached bit-reversed on > the databus also? And an option for a bit-shift in the data itself? If there's such hardware out there that needs to be supported, yes. :-) -Scott _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
