From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Peter Tyser <ptyser@xes-inc.com>
Date: Sat, 18 Apr 2009 22:13:58 -0500
Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH 2/7] i2c: Create common
	default	i2c_[set|get]_bus_speed() functions
In-Reply-To: <200904181423.42634.vapier@gentoo.org>
References: <cover.1239909546.git.ptyser@xes-inc.com>
	<7ef937438f1ac94c64a2e8869c0847f39c0eac67.1239909546.git.ptyser@xes-inc.com>
	<200904181423.42634.vapier@gentoo.org>
Message-ID: <1240110838.15397.13.camel@ptyser-laptop>
List-Id: <u-boot.lists.denx.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: u-boot@lists.denx.de

On Sat, 2009-04-18 at 14:23 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Thursday 16 April 2009 15:41:22 Peter Tyser wrote:
> > +unsigned int i2c_get_bus_speed(void)
> > +	__attribute((weak, alias("__def_i2c_get_bus_speed")));
> 
> __attribute__ ?

Interesting, thanks for catching that.  I blindly copied the weak
functions in net/eth.c which also use the __attribute declaration.  It
looks like gcc treats __attribute and __attribute__ the same, but I
couldn't find any definitive info on __attribute.  I'll resubmit using
__attribute__.

Anyone have a reason that we shouldn't replace all u-boot references to
__attribute with __attribute__?

Thanks,
Peter