On Wed, Jul 26, 2017 at 10:28:38AM -0600, Simon Glass wrote: > Hi Tom, > > On 26 July 2017 at 10:11, Tom Rini <tr...@konsulko.com> wrote: > > On Sun, Jul 23, 2017 at 09:20:06PM -0600, Simon Glass wrote: > > > >> We are now using an env_ prefix for environment functions. Rename these > >> for consistency. Also add function comments in common.h. > >> > >> Suggested-by: Wolfgang Denk <w...@denx.de> > >> Signed-off-by: Simon Glass <s...@chromium.org> > >> --- > >> > >> Changes in v2: > >> - Add new patch to rename setenv() and friends to env_set() > > [snip] > >> 214 files changed, 630 insertions(+), 599 deletions(-) > > > > This gets pretty massive, and the "and friends" includes things like > > eth_setenv_enetaddr and fsl_setenv_chain_of_trust. Wolfgang, since it > > was your suggestion, how about we just rename setenv() to env_set() to > > match the rest and leave "and friends" alone? Thanks! > > I'm fine with that. It does leave some inconsistency though. Is that > the end state you want?
Honestly? I think so, yes. "^setenv()$" becoming "^env_set()$" to match the rest of the "^env_xxx()$" API makes sense to me, while "^eth_setenv_enetaddr()$" and "^fsl_setenv_chain_of_trust()$" are other namespaces and at least should be stand-alone patches that their respective custodians ack and pickup. YMMV on if those different names make it clearer in those cases, but making it clear setenv() is part of the env_xxx family is an improvement in my mind. And %s/set/get/ as well, for the follow-up patch of course. -- Tom
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot
