From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Haavard Skinnemoen Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2007 20:59:08 +0100 Subject: [U-Boot-Users] [PATCH0/2] Re-do the patch for adding DO_SYNC in flash_write_cmd In-Reply-To: <20070209194200.237A535265F@atlas.denx.de> References: <1171043255.3932.20.camel@udp097531uds.am.freescale.net> <20070209194200.237A535265F@atlas.denx.de> Message-ID: <1defaf580702091159s2e2fc9e7wf962d4fff0ec985c@mail.gmail.com> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de On 2/9/07, Wolfgang Denk wrote: > In message <1171043255.3932.20.camel@udp097531uds.am.freescale.net> you wrote: > > Because SYNC is already defined in include/ppc_asm.tmpl for some ppc > > based CPUs to use, I use DO_SYNC instead of SYNC for this patch. > > AFAICT that's a general definition which is not specific to "some ppc > based CPUs" only. Rather than redefining it why not just use this > definition? It seems to match our purposes. Except that it's not written in C ;-) Haavard