Am 24.06.2011 16:53 schrieb Stefan Tauner: > This can be used in various situations (including one in the upcoming SFDP > patch) and > removes one FIXME in current HEAD. Needed to move check_block_eraser (which > checks a > single eraser) up to avoid (upcoming) forward declaration(s). >
Since nobody objected to the "forward declarations" RFC, I think we can safely say that moving code around inside a file is a bad idea. Please kill that part. > Signed-off-by: Stefan Tauner <[email protected]> > --- > flashrom.c | 70 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------------------- > 1 files changed, 40 insertions(+), 30 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/flashrom.c b/flashrom.c > index 6979d84..aed10aa 100644 > --- a/flashrom.c > +++ b/flashrom.c > @@ @@ > +/* Returns the number of well-defined erasers for a chip. > + * The log parameter controls output. */ > +static int check_block_erasers(const struct flashchip *flash, int log) > Hm. Can you call it count_usable_erasers or count_usable_block_erasers instead? > +{ > + int usable_erasefunctions = 0; > + int k; > + for (k = 0; k < NUM_ERASEFUNCTIONS; k++) { > + if (!check_block_eraser(flash, k, 0)) > + usable_erasefunctions++; > + } > + return usable_erasefunctions; > +} > + > Rest looks good to me. Regards, Carl-Daniel -- http://www.hailfinger.org/ _______________________________________________ flashrom mailing list [email protected] http://www.flashrom.org/mailman/listinfo/flashrom
