On Sat, 07 May 2011 22:33:13 +0200
Carl-Daniel Hailfinger <[email protected]> wrote:
making the printing independent from probing is of course the right
thing to do.
can we rename the printlock field of the struct or at least change the
comment indicating that is does not only _lock_ printing but chip
status printing? or do you want to use the field for getting/printing
generic lock layout data for each chip later? i would think having a
method to _additionally_ print out the status bits would be useful in
that case anyway?
> > the same applies to:
> >
> >> msg_cdbg("Chip status register: Status Register Write
> >> Disable " "(SRWD) is %sset\n", (status& (1<< 7)) ? "" : "not ");
> >>
> > in a25.c (only).
> >
>
> Hm yes. I was not sure whether moving a single line to a separate
> function is a good idea or not.
well... spi_prettyprint_status_register_atmel_at25_srpl ;)
--
Kind regards/Mit freundlichen Grüßen, Stefan Tauner
_______________________________________________
flashrom mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.flashrom.org/mailman/listinfo/flashrom
