On 30.07.2008 06:12, ron minnich wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 29, 2008 at 6:32 PM, Carl-Daniel Hailfinger wrote:
>
>> One thing I see as a problem in both versions is how I can specify
>> different settings for each instance of a chip appearing multiple times
>> on a board. (I may be misinterpreting struct name generation...)
>>
>
> I checked and the path is part of the instance. So if you have
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] etc. }
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] { etc. }
>
> and they're the same part, you still get two structs, one which looks like:
> struct superio_winbond_hf86whatever_config ioport_2e
> and
> struct superio_winbond_hf86whatever_config ioport_4e
>
> i.e you get the struct (the kind) and the path is flattened into the
> name to make it unique (the instance).
>
Thanks for clearing this up. I had only looked at the struct type name,
not the struct instance name. My apologies.
Regards,
Carl-Daniel
--
coreboot mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot
