Hi Ajay, On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 2:36 PM, Ajay Bhargav <ajay.bhar...@einfochips.com> wrote: > Dear Wolfgang, > >> >> Is there any specific reason for not using u32 for the padding as >> well? >> > nothing specific. It makes easy to find number of bytes than words. > >> >> Why would you need this BASE + OFFSET notation when using a C struct >> for the registers? Thi smakes little sense to me. >> > > Well I did use the C struct method, if you see my patches submitted earlier > but according to Prafulla and Lie structure size is too big. so they want me > to use a mix of C struct and BASE + OFFSET notation. so I thought to break > the big > C struct into smaller grouped structures pointing each group with GPIO base + > group > offset. I would be glad if you can suggest me something better or smarter. >
I think we make thing complicated here. For GPIO driver, the only structure we need to define is the GPIO register itself, like GPIO_PLR, GPIO_PDR, etc... For the previous long huge structure and include your recent short version is still not good enough. What we want to get is the base address, and based on the register structure to do explicit work. So either get the base address based on MACRO, or get from a function I think both should be ok for me. But please not continue work on how to define the base address into a structure. Best regards, Lei _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
