From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Wolfgang Denk Date: Thu, 04 Jun 2009 21:06:18 +0200 Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH 2/3] Add generic bit operations In-Reply-To: <20090604180042.GN26688@buzzloop.caiaq.de> References: <1244111241-32735-1-git-send-email-daniel@caiaq.de> <1244111241-32735-2-git-send-email-daniel@caiaq.de> <1244111241-32735-3-git-send-email-daniel@caiaq.de> <20090604114717.3763B832E416@gemini.denx.de> <20090604115442.GI26688@buzzloop.caiaq.de> <20090604115922.E6893832E416@gemini.denx.de> <20090604180042.GN26688@buzzloop.caiaq.de> Message-ID: <20090604190618.2E054832E416@gemini.denx.de> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de Dear Daniel Mack, In message <20090604180042.GN26688@buzzloop.caiaq.de> you wrote: > > Ok. I just saw ubifs implementing its own set_bit() functions and > considered that the wrong place for such functions to live in. ext2 > seems to do the same things, also minix. Platforms which want to > enable support for these filesystems have to do an evil #define to > map ext2_set_bit() to the platform specific version. Which is all > bogus, you might agree. And because of that situation, ubifs can't > currently build for anything else than ppc > (according to 'git grep -w fls include/asm*'). Yes, we have a mess here, and we need toclean this up ASAP. I'm trying to find out if there is any agreement what a portable set of I/O and bit macro definitions should look like. > Anyway - applying the first patch of this series would at least prevent > others from being mislead by dead and wrong code. ACK on that. Best regards, Wolfgang Denk -- DENX Software Engineering GmbH, MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: wd at denx.de There are three ways to get something done: do it yourself, hire someone, or forbid your kids to do it.