On 07/03/2012 04:33 PM, Tom Rini wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 04, 2012 at 12:31:14AM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
>> Dear Tom Rini,
>>
>> [...]
>>
>>>>>>> + debug("%s: %s 0x%p\n", __func__, cmd_buf, cmd_buf);
>>>>>>> + run_command(cmd_buf, 0);
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Holy Moly ... can we not make this into simple calls to those
>>>>>> subsystems ? Instead invoking command is crazy ;-)
>>>>>
>>>>> Are they really simple? There's a few other places we do this, and so
>>>>> long as it's documented that DFU depends on CONFIG_FAT_WRITE for
>>>>> writing to fat and so forth.
>>>>
>>>> Well ain't it easier to call fat_write() or similar?
>>>
>>> Assuming that most of the logic in do_fat_fswrite is needed, no. And I
>>> think a good portion of it is, at first glance at least.
>>
>> Abstracting it out into a function won't cut it?
>
> My inclination would be to say that seems a bit sillier than just using
> run_command(...) to call the existing command.
Abstracting into a function definitely means the compiler will be able
to type-check all the arguments to the function. Is the same true using
run_command; I assume everything gets serialized to an array of strings
and hence any validation is deferred until run-time then?
_______________________________________________
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
