[coreboot] [poll] device_t

[ron minnich]

On Fri, May 8, 2015 at 8:31 AM Aaron Durbin <adurbin at google.com> wrote:

>
> I personally feel that changing device_t type based on stage makes the
> code non-obvious and hard to follow.
>
> I'd rather we *always* provide simple u32 device_t functions in all
> stages while allowing struct device IO functions for use in ramstage.
>
>

that's pretty much the approach I tried to take in v3. While the device_t
stuff is cool it's too hard for my brain.

BUT, it's there, been in use for a long time, not sure this is the best
time to change it.

But The Will of the People will decide.

ron
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.coreboot.org/pipermail/coreboot/attachments/20150508/b6f7a8b3/attachment.html>