В Mon, 7 Feb 2011 10:53:25 -0800 Tirumala Marri <tma...@apm.com> пишет:
> dwc_read_reg32 is used nowhere throughout the code. One of dwc_read32 and > dwc_read_reg32 should be removed IMO. There was once only dwc_read_reg32. In > version 5 of your patchset I believe. Why did you add another function? > AFAIK it is not correct to store pointers in u32 because they need 8 bytes > on 64-bit archs. So it was ok with the old dwc_read_reg32. > [Marri] If u32 is 8bytes isn't pointer type would be 8bytes as well. Sorry, I don't understand that. I think u32 is always 32bit = 4byte on all archs. Right? > I had change the API to avoid type castings to register addresses. IMO it's now much worse because you pass a u32 value and cast it internally to a pointer. I think it's unsafe and counter-intuitive. BTW what is the problem with type casting to register addresses that you mention? I've checked version 5 of your patchset (which is the last version where the old API is used) and there are no casts. -- Alexander
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
