[coreboot] device_t vs. struct device*

Myles Watson mylesgw at gmail.com
Mon May 11 16:04:08 CEST 2009

On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 7:53 AM, Carl-Daniel Hailfinger
<c-d.hailfinger.devel.2006 at gmx.net> wrote:
> On 11.05.2009 15:43, Myles Watson wrote:
>> We seem to have a mix of usage here.  Is there a reason we shouldn't
>> just use one?  Which one is preferred?
>> >From src/include/device/device.h:
>> typedef struct device * device_t;
> It's a bit complicated.
> In early (CAR/ROMCC) code, device_t is u32 for stack size reasons.
> Later, device_t is struct device *.
Right.  I think I knew that but was repressing it. :)

> Using device_t allows to share some header files and/or code. However,
> it gets confusing very fast. If you can untangle the mess, please go
> ahead. I will ack that.

> Maybe renaming the u32 variants of PCI access functions to *_early or so
> is one way to proceed.

So to avoid as much confusion as possible, should we use struct device
* in functions that should never be called early, or should we just
always use device_t because it is shorter and prettier?


More information about the coreboot mailing list