Attention is currently required from: Jason Glenesk, Marshall Dawson, Paul Menzel.
Felix Held has posted comments on this change. ( https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/58224 )
Change subject: soc/amd/common/block/include/psp_efs: use unsigned type for bitfield
......................................................................
Patch Set 1:
(1 comment)
File src/soc/amd/common/block/include/amdblocks/psp_efs.h:
https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/58224/comment/363ecc9e_ee6cb1ca
PS1, Line 29: uint32_t
Why not use the generic type `unsigned int`?
mostly for consistency with the rest of the file, but also to clarify that the bits will be packed into a 32 bit memory location. since this isn't an 8 or 16 bit architecture where an unsigned int might end up being only 16 bits, unsigned int would also work and i'd expect it to result in an identical binary in this case, but i still prefer using an uint32_t here
--
To view, visit
https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/58224
To unsubscribe, or for help writing mail filters, visit
https://review.coreboot.org/settings
Gerrit-Project: coreboot
Gerrit-Branch: master
Gerrit-Change-Id: Ic630d1709174d90336746bc37da504437c12643c
Gerrit-Change-Number: 58224
Gerrit-PatchSet: 1
Gerrit-Owner: Felix Held
felix-coreboot@felixheld.de
Gerrit-Reviewer: Jason Glenesk
jason.glenesk@gmail.com
Gerrit-Reviewer: Marshall Dawson
marshalldawson3rd@gmail.com
Gerrit-Reviewer: Raul Rangel
rrangel@chromium.org
Gerrit-Reviewer: build bot (Jenkins)
no-reply@coreboot.org
Gerrit-CC: Paul Menzel
paulepanter@mailbox.org
Gerrit-Attention: Jason Glenesk
jason.glenesk@gmail.com
Gerrit-Attention: Marshall Dawson
marshalldawson3rd@gmail.com
Gerrit-Attention: Paul Menzel
paulepanter@mailbox.org
Gerrit-Comment-Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2021 01:31:40 +0000
Gerrit-HasComments: Yes
Gerrit-Has-Labels: No
Comment-In-Reply-To: Paul Menzel
paulepanter@mailbox.org
Gerrit-MessageType: comment