On 18:30 Sun 24 May , Dirk Behme wrote:
> Dear Jean-Christophe,
>
> Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote:
>>>>> void beagle_identify(void)
>>>>> {
>>>>> - gpio_t *gpio6_base = (gpio_t *)OMAP34XX_GPIO6_BASE;
>>>>> + struct gpio *gpio6_base = (struct gpio *)OMAP34XX_GPIO6_BASE;
>>>> please use a namespace name gpio is too much generic
>>>> and it's the same for the other struct sms, pm etc...
>>>> omap_ will be better as the omap4 will certanly use the same or near IP
>>> But OMAP4 most probably will not use a file board/omap3/beagle/beagle.c.
>>>
>>> And using "omap_" would be wrong if your argument is OMAP4. Then it
>>> needs at least to be "omap3_".
>>>
>>> And I can't see how a local variable could pollute the namespace, if
>>> this is what you mean.
>> where did I speak about var name?
>
> Nowhere, sorry. I talk about it. Please replace string 'local variable'
> by 'local struct' above if you think it fits better.
>
>> the stuct name need to be less generic
>
> Why? Please see my arguments why I think it's fine as done in Matthias'
> patch.
No as If we implemenent any generic API we will have the conflict as I've to
fix for the stdio
so NAK
Best Regards,
J.
_______________________________________________
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
