From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Tolunay Orkun <listmember@orkun.us>
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2007 01:23:11 -0600
Subject: [U-Boot-Users] [PATCH0/2] Re-do the patch for adding DO_SYNC in
 flash_write_cmd
In-Reply-To: <20070210010420.CD5CB353CAA@atlas.denx.de>
References: <20070210010420.CD5CB353CAA@atlas.denx.de>
Message-ID: <45CD72DF.8070409@orkun.us>
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

Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> In message <1171050483.3932.31.camel@udp097531uds.am.freescale.net> you wrote:
>> SYNC is defined as 
>> "	#define SYNC \
>>         sync; \
>>         isync
>> " in include/ppc_asm.tmpl,
>>
>> and can not be used by .c file, am I right? :-). In fact it is used by
>> the start.S file for 85xx/83xx/8xx/4xx/5xxx/74xx_7xx.
>>
>> We need to define SYNC as asm("sync;").
> 
> Or, to be sure, ""sync;isync"

OK.

> 
> Where is the problem? Which code includes include/ppc_asm.tmpl ?  Why
> cannot  we  have  the  same  definition  once  for  C  and  again for
> assembler?

I agree, I think we can define the equivalent one in a C header file

#define SYNC asm("sync; isync;")

I am not sure if the assembler one is ever included in the C code.

Tolunay