From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from imap.sh.mvista.com (unknown [63.81.120.155]) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9AC54DE020 for ; Wed, 14 Feb 2007 04:33:33 +1100 (EST) Message-ID: <45D1F659.6090106@ru.mvista.com> Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2007 20:33:13 +0300 From: Sergei Shtylyov MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Timur Tabi Subject: Re: [PATCH] Check mac-address first in fsl_soc.c References: <11710513671236-git-send-email-timur@freescale.com> <45CCDEFB.5050504@ru.mvista.com> <45CCDFBC.1090104@freescale.com> <45CCE07F.9040107@ru.mvista.com> <45D1F46C.4050901@freescale.com> In-Reply-To: <45D1F46C.4050901@freescale.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, paulus@samba.org List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Hello. Timur Tabi wrote: >> I'm mainly concerned about 85xx. I guess the needed change should >> be very alike... > I've submitted U-Boot patches for 83xx, 85xx, 86xx, and 5xxx to the > maintainers. You'll have to ask them when the patches will be applied. In fact, I/'m regretting not fixing this myself -- Andy said it'll be fixed RSN and it took about 2 months (actually, more since the issue was first noticed by me in October)... >>> I wanted to keep my patch simple. >> That's clearly an over-simplification to repeat the same code thrice. > Actually, the 2nd and third instances are conditionally compiled, so in I think that's a bad excuse. You could have coded inline function at least. > most cases only one instance of the code will actually be compiled. > gfar_of_init() should probably also be conditionally compiled, so if I But it's not? > make it a separate function, I'd have to prefix it with something like > this: > #if defined(CONFIG_GIANFAR) || defined(CONFIG_CPM2) || defined(CONFIG_8xx) > and then I would need to pass a bunch of parameters. I don't really > think that's an improvement. > Paul, if there are no serious objections, please apply this patch. I object -- such practice produces the code that is harder to change and which is more likely to get out of sync between the 3 instances later. :-/ WBR, Sergei