On 11 July 2013 08:56, Peter Crosthwaite <peter.crosthwa...@xilinx.com> wrote: > Hi All, > > Any objections to a tree wide: > > s/qemu_devtree/qemu_fdt
No objection from me... > FWIU, the qemu_ prefix is supposed to indicate a wrapping of an API, > in this case that API clearly being "fdt_" not "devtree_". It buys > back a previous 4 chars, in line length, with line length being an > obstacle to adding "_nofail" versions of the APIs as we should. ...and I'd definitely like to see a cleanup of our error handling in these wrapper functions (I guess we should use Error**?) thanks -- PMM
