On Wednesday, October 13, 2010 03:44:52 Reinhard Meyer wrote:
> Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_SPI_FRAM_RAMTRON
> > + { 6, 0xc2, spi_fram_probe_ramtron, },
> > +# undef IDCODE_CONT_LEN
> > +# define IDCODE_CONT_LEN 6
> > +#endif
>
> That code should only increase the IDCODE_CONT_LEN, not
> set it to a value. It might have been set larger by a
> previous #ifdef.i noticed that, but this isnt any different from your original patch, and i figured we could delay worrying about that when someone else proposed something that wanted to change the size. whichever you want. > Even "nicer" and maybe better understandable could be: > > +#ifdef CONFIG_SPI_FRAM_RAMTRON > +# define RAMTRON_CONT_LEN 6 i'd prefer the first version. i dont think this gains us much. > I cannot test all this right now. Maybe you put just the probing > part (1/2) into mainline, once all my local ahead-of-MASTER and posted > patches are in mainline, I'll do a big rebase and fix session here and > post a new ramtron patch. OK -mike
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list [email protected] http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
