From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Marek Vasut Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2012 14:55:11 +0200 Subject: [U-Boot] [RFC PATCH 2/5] mxs: prefix register acessor macros with 'mxs' prefix In-Reply-To: References: <1343515844-5764-1-git-send-email-otavio@ossystems.com.br> <5014DF95.7070803@denx.de> Message-ID: <201207291455.11335.marex@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 Otavio Salvador, > On Sun, Jul 29, 2012 at 4:00 AM, Stefano Babic wrote: > > Personally I prefer that the function names are the same and the > > implementation itself of the function hides the SOC details. In this > > way, we provide the same interface API to the user (=the board > > maintainer) and to the drivers that are surely shared between the MX28 > > and MX23. > > Sure but the accessing structure is the same for MX233 and MX28 so > makes sense to have it with SOC name. If we have some divertion here a > ifdef will be need to handle. And fill the files with gazilions of ifdefs, making them unreadable. > I also think we ought to try to split function implementation when it > diverts much (as code of spl_mem_init does spl_mem_init() does not. How? > ) to make it easy to follow > and maintain but this is not done yet. Best regards, Marek Vasut