[coreboot] Unifying IO accessor macros

[David Hendricks]

On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 10:52 AM, Julius Werner <jwerner at 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.
> >
> > http://review.coreboot.org/8483
>
> 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.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.coreboot.org/pipermail/coreboot/attachments/20150218/58ad1175/attachment.html>