Re: [coreboot] Unifying IO accessor macros

On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 10:52 AM, Julius Werner <jwerner@chromium.org> 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.
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. -- David Hendricks (dhendrix) Systems Software Engineer, Google Inc.
participants (1)
-
David Hendricks