Am 13.06.2011 20:31 schrieb Stefan Tauner:
On Mon, 13 Jun 2011 19:24:55 +0200 Carl-Daniel Hailfinger c-d.hailfinger.devel.2006@gmx.net wrote:
Am 08.06.2011 04:55 schrieb Stefan Tauner:
~10 lines less, documenting better what the differences are (i.e. offset of BBAR only).
Signed-off-by: Stefan Tauner stefan.tauner@student.tuwien.ac.at
Nice cleanup! Acked-by: Carl-Daniel Hailfinger c-d.hailfinger.devel.2006@gmx.net
ahem! :)
because of idwer's remark that "msg_pdbg("Reserved bits in BBAR not zero: 0x%04x"..." should get a \n (thx!), i reviewed that patch again and noticed that it is quite broken.
in the original code the real bbar is read from the register and checked for reserved bits before we try to set the requested min address. i somehow missed that, sorry. :/
Ouch. I overlooked that during review. The patch looked so simple.
the new, attached patch has following changes:
- check for reserved bits
- output 8 hex characters instead of 4 (i.e. 32b instead of 16b)
- add \n to the message above
Since you're already changing the function prototype of ich_set_bbar, can you make it static?
And another point about the coding style: Can you use int bbar_offs instead of void *bbar_addr? That way, it is easier to check directly which physmap region the accesses correspond to.
Regards, Carl-Daniel