[U-Boot] [PATCHWORK] 71715 -> Not applicable.

[Albert ARIBAUD <albert.aribaud@free.fr>]

Le 19/11/2010 08:13, Mike Frysinger a ?crit :
> On Friday, November 19, 2010 00:59:47 Albert ARIBAUD wrote:
>> Le 19/11/2010 00:13, Mike Frysinger a ?crit :
>>> On Thursday, November 18, 2010 17:21:49 Albert ARIBAUD wrote:
>>>> Besides, about half the archs do not use asm-generic/unaligned, and half
>>>> do
>>>
>>> that's because half the arches implemented unaligned.h whilst only
>>> thinking of themselves.  the other half benefited from my work of
>>> thinking of everyone.
>>>
>>>> a resubmit on the list will be the occasion
>>>
>>> i dont use/care about arm.  i wrote the patch because i wanted to be
>>> nice.  if you cant be bothered to clean up arm cruft, then feel free to
>>> mark the patch as "pending due to maintainer laziness".
>>>
>>>> for example, to discuss whether all arches should use it.
>>>
>>> all arches should use it.  whether the maintainers can be bothered to fix
>>> their headers is a different question.
>>
>> My question was about the technical merits of the patch: why should all
>> arches use it? What does it improve at a performance, maintenability, or
>> other technical level ?
>
> obviously maintenance is improved since only one header needs to be maintained
> and it isnt an arm one
> -mike

Maintenance being about changes, I did a git log on both 
include/asm-generic/unaligned.h and arch/arm/include/asm/unaligned.h. 
Each has exactly one commit: the generic one when creating the file, the 
arm one when the directories were rearranged. Very little changes either 
way.

I do understand the benefit in overall maintenability of having a common 
situation for all archs. But I don't think there is an increase of 
maintenability per se in, basically, adding a level of #include.

If the goal is 'have all arches use a single unaligned.h' --  then fine, 
let us *remove* the unaligned.h files in arches and refer to the generic 
one instead. That, indeed, would increase maintenability by *reducing* 
the number of files while *not* adding any complexity. I'll happily ack 
such a change.

In any case, this is not specifically an 'arm' topic: it touches all 
arches albeit lightly -- as you point out, Mike, this is a generic 
change. So I'd rather see a patchset to fix this globally and for good 
for every arch.

Amicalement,
-- 
Albert.