On Thu, Jun 04, 2009 at 01:59:22PM +0200, Wolfgang Denk wrote: > > And the functions I removed from asm-arm/bitops.h did that? > > No. Let's be happy that we have eliminated some poor code, and if we > add a replacement, let's make sure not to repeat the mistakes of the > past again.
Ok. I just saw ubifs implementing its own set_bit() functions and considered that the wrong place for such functions to live in. ext2 seems to do the same things, also minix. Platforms which want to enable support for these filesystems have to do an evil #define to map ext2_set_bit() to the platform specific version. Which is all bogus, you might agree. And because of that situation, ubifs can't currently build for anything else than ppc (according to 'git grep -w fls include/asm*'). Hence I thought it might be a good idea (or at least a good start thereof) to put the functions where I believe they belong to - a 'generic' place. Anyway - applying the first patch of this series would at least prevent others from being mislead by dead and wrong code. Daniel _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
