Attention is currently required from: Subrata Banik, Nico Huber, Angel Pons, Anastasia Klimchuk. Subrata Banik has posted comments on this change. ( https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/62894 )
Change subject: ichspi: Rename HSFC_FDBC -> HSFC_FDBC_MASK ......................................................................
Patch Set 6:
(2 comments)
Commit Message:
https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/62894/comment/53cbb9b2_4b6fce3e PS6, Line 10: during the data portion of the SPI cycle.
What's the reasoning for this change? The commit message doesn't explain *why* this change would be desired.
without this CL, what HSFC_FDBC represents is a mask to perform the byte shift, hence rename to reflect the same.
HSFC_FDBC_MASK macro represents the number of bytes to shift in or out during the data portion of the SPI cycle.
File ichspi.c:
https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/62894/comment/4003b24e_4cffa435 PS4, Line 508: FDBC
Hmmm, if the new macro name doesn't work nicely with the existing code, maybe it wasn't meant to be changed?
Or maybe it's worth updating all the mask macros along with the `pprint_reg` macro to avoid having to use `_pprint_reg` directly.
It's not that, this CL first introduces such direct usage of _pprint_reg instead pprint_reg. Refer below:
https://github.com/flashrom/flashrom/blob/master/ichspi.c#L466
This was the case when HSFC macros names are not compatible to get used with pprint_reg macro, folks uses _pprint_reg directly. won't expect any performance impact and debug log impact with this changes.
-
Subrata Banik (Code Review)