On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 7:53 AM, Carl-Daniel Hailfinger <[email protected]> wrote: > On 11.05.2009 15:43, Myles Watson wrote: >> We seem to have a mix of usage here. Is there a reason we shouldn't >> just use one? Which one is preferred? >> >> >From src/include/device/device.h: >> typedef struct device * device_t; >> > > It's a bit complicated. > In early (CAR/ROMCC) code, device_t is u32 for stack size reasons. > Later, device_t is struct device *. Right. I think I knew that but was repressing it. :)
> Using device_t allows to share some header files and/or code. However, > it gets confusing very fast. If you can untangle the mess, please go > ahead. I will ack that. :) > Maybe renaming the u32 variants of PCI access functions to *_early or so > is one way to proceed. So to avoid as much confusion as possible, should we use struct device * in functions that should never be called early, or should we just always use device_t because it is shorter and prettier? Thanks, Myles -- coreboot mailing list: [email protected] http://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot
