Le 22/10/2011 00:02, Simon Glass a écrit : > Hi Albert, > > On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 2:47 PM, Albert ARIBAUD > <albert.u.b...@aribaud.net> wrote: >> Le 21/10/2011 23:12, Simon Glass a écrit : >>> >>> Hi Albert, >>> >>> On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 2:00 PM, Albert ARIBAUD >>> <albert.u.b...@aribaud.net> wrote: >>>> >>>> Le 21/10/2011 22:19, Simon Glass a écrit : >>>>> >>>>> Hi Albert, >>>>> >>>>> On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 12:54 PM, Albert ARIBAUD >>>>> <albert.u.b...@aribaud.net> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Hi Simon, >>>>>> >>>>>> Le 10/10/2011 21:22, Simon Glass a écrit : >>>>>>> >>>>>>> This brings a basic limits.h implementation into U-Boot. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Simon Glass<s...@chromium.org> >>>>>>> --- >>>>>>> fs/ubifs/ubifs.h | 4 +--- >>>>>>> include/limits.h | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >>>>>>> 2 files changed, 41 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) >>>>>>> create mode 100644 include/limits.h >>>>>> >>>>>> Apparently, in all the U-Boot codebase, only one file required standard >>>>>> limit names, and gets them with three lines of code. Is it worth adding >>>>>> 40 >>>>>> lines of code for this? >>>>> >>>>> Well 2/3 is the license header - and I thought it best to add all the >>>>> limits in one go. I can add just those few if you like. >>>>> >>>>> This file is used later in the patch series. >>>> >>>> I don't see much use of these in the subsequent patches either -- and >>>> those >>>> few uses could be discussed, such as for instance the use of INT_MAX as >>>> the >>>> maximum buffer size for some *printf() functions -- actually, anything >>>> very >>>> big would fit just as well, would it not? >>> >>> Yes it would, it's doesn't really need to be INT_MAX. Then again, >>> limits.h is a fairly standard file to have around, and INT_MAX is an >>> efficient 'large' value to load on many architectures. >>> >>> In any case it seems wrong to me that ubifs is defining its own >>> INT_MAX and U-Boot doesn't have one. >> >> My point is precisely that as standard as limits.h is, U-Boot has managed to >> survive not having it around so far, which kind of shows limits.h is not >> needed. > > By that logic one would never do any code clean ups. Do I understand > you correctly?
You're extending my logic here: not all cleanups are done by adding a header file and replacing some lines by an include and some other lines. :) Actually, I don't think introducing limits.h is any cleanup; it is an attempt at using standards whenever possible, which may be fine with some standards: I'd be happy of U-Boot used uint{8,16,32}_t instead of u{8,16,32}, for instance, because it uses that a lot. With limits.h, my gripe with it here is that, while possible, I don't see it bringing benefits here as 1) the ubi code already defines what it needs, 2) other uses in the patchset do not actually require /limits/, and 3) there are not many places in the whole U-Boot code that do. If you can prove me wrong, i.e. if you can show that limits.h would add a lot of benefits to more than the other files in its own patchset, then I'll happily reconsider. > But this is the least of my concerns :-) If you don't want it, don't > take it. Shall I modify the series to define its own INT_MAX, or just > chose a large number? Well I don't think the limits.h introduction is useful here, and not introducing it will barely cost a source code line. As for the number to use in *printf(), either way is fine with me, as this number is arbitrary anyway. > BTW I think you are looking at the old version of that patch series - > we are now on v4. The limits.h patch is the same though. Later on in > the series I add comments to vsprintf() functions and move them into > their own header. If you apply the same logic there then that tidy is > not needed also. Please let me know. Thanks for reminding me. I did see the V4 series and it is the one I actually commented on in my previous mail. Apologies for not having made that explicit. > Regards, > Simon Amicalement, -- Albert. _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot