Hi Bin, On 15 June 2015 at 18:19, Bin Meng <bmeng...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Simon, > > On Tue, Jun 16, 2015 at 4:45 AM, Simon Glass <s...@chromium.org> wrote: >> Hi Bin, >> >> On 13 June 2015 at 04:11, Bin Meng <bmeng...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> Introduce a new method 'get_count' in the UCLASS_CPU ops to get >>> the number of CPUs in the system. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Bin Meng <bmeng...@gmail.com> >>> >>> --- >>> >>> Changes in v3: >>> - Drop patches already applied and rebase on u-boot-x86/master >>> - New patch to add a new get_count method to cpu uclass >>> >>> Changes in v2: None >>> >>> drivers/cpu/cpu-uclass.c | 10 ++++++++++ >>> include/cpu.h | 18 ++++++++++++++++++ >>> 2 files changed, 28 insertions(+) >>> >>> diff --git a/drivers/cpu/cpu-uclass.c b/drivers/cpu/cpu-uclass.c >>> index d6be9d4..8efb17c 100644 >>> --- a/drivers/cpu/cpu-uclass.c >>> +++ b/drivers/cpu/cpu-uclass.c >>> @@ -32,6 +32,16 @@ int cpu_get_info(struct udevice *dev, struct cpu_info >>> *info) >>> return ops->get_info(dev, info); >>> } >>> >>> +int cpu_get_count(struct udevice *dev, int *count) >> >> Can we please return count and avoid the 'count' parameter? We can use >> -ve for errors. >> > > Yes, but I was wondering that if it looks inconsistent to other two > cpu ops? (or maybe other dm driver ops?)
I think that if the return value needs to be a postive int, then we should just use the return value. In other cases perhaps not. It is slightly more efficient and a little easier to read. Regards, Simon _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot