From: "Robert P. J. Day" <rpjday@mindspring.com>
To: Dan Malek <dan@embeddededge.com>
Cc: Embedded PPC Linux list <linuxppc-embedded@ozlabs.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] first in a series to enhance microcode patches
Date: Tue, 5 Oct 2004 15:52:59 -0400 (EDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.60.0410051543230.3549@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <A337CA12-1703-11D9-B4FB-003065F9B7DC@embeddededge.com>
On Tue, 5 Oct 2004, Dan Malek wrote:
> No, send a whole patch that _does_ something. Let's see all of these
> changes at once. By itself, this patch is useless and doesn't add any
> features, it just wastes our time discussing it.
ok, not a problem. i'll submit it any way the powers that be prefer,
i just wanted explicit instructions on how. give me a day and i'll
have a full, working patch. that does something.
>> 2) redeclares reserved chunks in structures to be in terms of a
>> standard char array, rather than the hideous combination of uint,
>> ushort, and so on. (a purely aesthetic fix, admittedly.)
>
> Just for information, most of the original data structures were all
> machine generated with some minor manual touch ups. I certainly
> wasn't going to type in all of that stuff and risk mistakes with offsets
> and sizes.
that's definitely understandable. it's just potentially confusing to
have a structure's reserved chunks declared as some combination of
uchar, ushort, uint and/or ulong, when it's obviously more
comprehensible to make each reserved chunk a standard array of char
whose size is obvious at a glance.
just for fun,
$ cd include/asm-ppc
$ grep -i reserved *.h
man. the standards for declaring reserved space are all over the map,
including this one:
mpc52xx.h: volatile u32 reserved[4]; /* MMAP_CTRL + 0x3c ..
0x48 */
mpc52xx.h: volatile u32 reserved1; /* INTR + 0x20 */
mpc52xx.h: volatile u32 reserved2; /* INTR + 0x34 */
...
now *that* kind of creeps me out. why is reserved space being
declared as "volatile"? yeesh.
i may not understand what's happening here but, IMHO, if something
is declared as reserved, that should be an indication that *nobody* is
using it. if it's being used for anything, then it shouldn't be
labelled as "reserved"; it should have a name. to be both volatile
and reserved just makes me queasy. but that's just me.
rday
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-10-05 20:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-10-05 16:32 [PATCH] first in a series to enhance microcode patches Robert P. J. Day
2004-10-05 19:20 ` Dan Malek
2004-10-05 19:29 ` Tom Rini
2004-10-05 20:00 ` Robert P. J. Day
2004-10-05 20:53 ` Tom Rini
2004-10-05 19:52 ` Robert P. J. Day [this message]
2004-10-05 20:20 ` Wolfgang Denk
2004-10-06 13:30 ` Robert P. J. Day
2004-10-06 14:05 ` Mark Chambers
2004-10-06 14:01 ` Robert P. J. Day
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2004-10-05 17:32 Robert P. J. Day
2004-10-07 15:38 ` Tom Rini
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=Pine.LNX.4.60.0410051543230.3549@localhost.localdomain \
--to=rpjday@mindspring.com \
--cc=dan@embeddededge.com \
--cc=linuxppc-embedded@ozlabs.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).