On Mon, Oct 5, 2020 at 6:28 AM Sebastian Huber <sebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de> wrote: > > On 05/10/2020 14:22, Joel Sherrill wrote: > > > > > > > On Mon, Oct 5, 2020 at 1:59 AM Sebastian Huber > > <sebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de > > <mailto:sebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de>> wrote: > > > > On 04/10/2020 06:18, Kinsey Moore wrote: > > > > > diff --git a/bsps/arm/imx/start/bspstart.c > > b/bsps/arm/imx/start/bspstart.c > > > index 5fb07bf60a..ff4b204790 100644 > > > --- a/bsps/arm/imx/start/bspstart.c > > > +++ b/bsps/arm/imx/start/bspstart.c > > > @@ -18,6 +18,7 @@ > > > #include <bsp/fdt.h> > > > #include <bsp/irq-generic.h> > > > #include <bsp/linker-symbols.h> > > > +#include <dev/clock/arm-generic-timer.h> > > > > > > #include <libfdt.h> > > > > > > @@ -58,7 +59,7 @@ uint32_t bsp_fdt_map_intr(const uint32_t > > *intr, size_t icells) > > > return intr[1] + MAGIC_IRQ_OFFSET; > > > } > > > > > > -void arm_generic_timer_get_config( > > > +void aarch_generic_timer_get_config( > > Why did the function name change? The header file name starts also > > with > > arm and not aarch. > > > > > > ARM uses the terms aarch32 and aarch64 so it does make sense to > > refer bits and bobs as aarch. > I am not really fond of using aarch32 for existing stuff which already > had an arm prefix. I would use "arm" for shared stuff and the 32-bit > ARM. I would use "aarch64" for the 64-bit stuff.
I agree. Just because Arm is having a mid-life crisis doesn't mean we have to kowtow to it. > _______________________________________________ > devel mailing list > devel@rtems.org > http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@rtems.org http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
