Re: [coreboot] Unifying IO accessor macros

[David Hendricks]

On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 10:52 AM, Julius Werner 
wrote:
> > > As Patrick already said, compared to the total effort to integrate
>
> external
> > > sources, the issue of argument order is insignificant. In the time you
>
> spent
> > > writing this email, you could have found out how to do it with
>
> coccinelle, and
> > > could have applied it to any number of sources.
> >
> > http://review.coreboot.org/8483
>
> Remember that those other code bases use writel(v, a), not write32(v,
> a). Just going half the way by changing the order but not the name
> wouldn't be very useful I think.

Yes, fixing the order is far more important.

I wouldn't even care if we still end up with both write32(a, v) or
writel(a, v) in the codebase (or u32 vs. uint32_t), so long the usage is
consistent and wrappers are trivial.