Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v7 01/10] nds32: add header files support for nds32

2011-05-02 Thread Macpaul Lin
Hi Wolfgang, 2011/4/30 Wolfgang Denk w...@denx.de: Dear Macpaul Lin, It means adding any new code to U-Boot which includes typedefs. According to the checkpatch result, typedef warning exists in 4 files. arch/nds32/include/asm/posix_types.h arch/nds32/include/asm/types.h

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v7 01/10] nds32: add header files support for nds32

2011-04-29 Thread Wolfgang Denk
Dear Macpaul Lin, In message BANLkTi=hazvw17enwycmyf3mcrgmbm-...@mail.gmail.com you wrote: I think we still have to discuss about the typedef's. What does the new typedef means? It means adding any new code to U-Boot which includes typedefs. According to the checkpatch result, typedef

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v7 01/10] nds32: add header files support for nds32

2011-04-29 Thread Chih-Min Chao
On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 7:09 AM, Wolfgang Denk w...@denx.de wrote: Dear Macpaul Lin, In message BANLkTi=hazvw17enwycmyf3mcrgmbm-...@mail.gmail.com you wrote: I think we still have to discuss about the typedef's. What does the new typedef means? It means adding any new code to U-Boot which

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v7 01/10] nds32: add header files support for nds32

2011-04-10 Thread Macpaul Lin
Hi Wolfgang, I did check typedefs one by one by myself in hand and eye checking. If some thing is not suitable for using typedefs please let me know. Please don't add any new typedef's. I think we still have to discuss about the typedef's. What does the new typedef means? According to

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v7 01/10] nds32: add header files support for nds32

2011-04-08 Thread macpaul
Hi Wolfgang, This also triggers an erro-r from checkpatch, and indeed this is a strange define. +#define R0 uregs[1]/* R0 */ +#define R1 uregs[2] +#define R2 uregs[3] +#define R3 uregs[4] NAK. Please use a C struct instead. After discussed

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v7 01/10] nds32: add header files support for nds32

2011-04-08 Thread Macpaul Lin
Hi Wolfgang, Checkpatch complains a lot about do not add new typedefs. Indeed, but this seems is special for Linux Kernel, Not really.  This is Linux CodingStyle policy, which we usually adapt. I've checked some of the typedefs from other architecture code in u-boot. This does not mean

[U-Boot] [PATCH v7 01/10] nds32: add header files support for nds32

2011-04-07 Thread Macpaul Lin
Add generic header files support for nds32 architecture. Cache, ptregs, data type and other definitions are included. Signed-off-by: Macpaul Lin macp...@andestech.com --- Changes for v1-v4: - Code cleanup and style formatting. Changes for v5-v6: - This patch also updated the following

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v7 01/10] nds32: add header files support for nds32

2011-04-07 Thread Wolfgang Denk
Dear Macpaul Lin, In message 1302180333-25372-1-git-send-email-macp...@andestech.com you wrote: Add generic header files support for nds32 architecture. Cache, ptregs, data type and other definitions are included. Signed-off-by: Macpaul Lin macp...@andestech.com Checkpatch complains a lot

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v7 01/10] nds32: add header files support for nds32

2011-04-07 Thread Macpaul Lin
Hi Wolfgang, 2011/4/7 Wolfgang Denk w...@denx.de: Dear Macpaul Lin, Add generic header files support for nds32 architecture. Cache, ptregs, data type and other definitions are included. Signed-off-by: Macpaul Lin macp...@andestech.com Checkpatch complains a lot about do not add new

Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v7 01/10] nds32: add header files support for nds32

2011-04-07 Thread Wolfgang Denk
Dear Macpaul Lin, In message banlktimhcuocvmmfrsjghxyrhykfxjt...@mail.gmail.com you wrote: Checkpatch complains a lot about do not add new typedefs. Indeed, but this seems is special for Linux Kernel, Not really. This is Linux CodingStyle policy, which we usually adapt. I've checked