[coreboot] [PATCH] Make RAM check configurable via Kconfig

Uwe Hermann uwe at hermann-uwe.de
Sat Mar 8 02:09:22 CET 2008

On Fri, Mar 07, 2008 at 03:10:27PM -0800, ron minnich wrote:
> So, I am curious.
> I see this:
> 	ram_check(0, 640 * 1024);
> in a file. Could I be forgiven in thinking that a ram check might be
> done? I realize this is the "linux style" but I have never
> particularly liked it.
> What is wrong with
> #ifdef RAMTEST
> 	ram_check(0, 640 * 1024);
> #endif
> What do people prefer? Maybe I am just out of touch.

It's mostly a matter of preference, yes. The nice thing here is that
you have an #ifdef _once_ and not in every single location where
the function is called. Looks much cleaner overall in the code.

We do similar stuff with printk btw. Depending on the loglevel a

  prink(BIOS_INFO, "Hello world");

does something or does nothing. You wouldn't want to write 

  #if (LOGLEVEL >= x)

everytime you want to print a messge.

http://www.hermann-uwe.de  | http://www.holsham-traders.de
http://www.crazy-hacks.org | http://www.unmaintained-free-software.org

More information about the coreboot mailing list