Once the order is the same on all architectures, we could change itto match Linux at any point. I think its important to stop holding
up architectural unification in the name of the perfect solution.
The Coccinelle to switch the ordering is much safer to do after you have
the ordering consistent and both arguments to the write functions are
types which are incompatible with each other.
Personally I am in the camp of having the same order as Linux, but there
is a lot of ARM work held up because they are *different*. This is the
problem I am trying to solve. Lets make the best community decision
regardless of our personal opinions.
Kevin
On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 10:35 AM, Patrick Georgi <pgeorgi@google.com> wrote:2015-02-18 17:23 GMT+01:00 Vadim Bendebury <vbendeb@chromium.org>:
kernel, u-boot, etc. They all have the write(val, addr) semantics. I
see no good reason to artificially erect an ever present barrier for
integrating code into a coreboot system.
Since all imported code requires some rework before it works for us,
and redoing that particular issue is a matter of a simple spatch
(http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/), I'm not sure that's actually that big a
concern.
@@
expression a,v;
@@
-writel(v,a)
+write32(a, v)
Can you provide the spatch utility and script as well as thedocumentation so that every potential contributor can perform thenecessary steps? Or we could be done w/ it once and for all and fixthe existing coreboot semantics. Then there's not another step foranyone in perpetuity. Also keep in mind it's not just software goinginto coreboot but reusing software within coreboot as well. It's a 2way street.I did volunteer to do the big change, and if people want I will. Let me know.-Aaron-- coreboot mailing list: coreboot@coreboot.orghttp://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot