From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Albert ARIBAUD <albert.u.boot@aribaud.net>
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2011 09:09:40 +0200
Subject: [U-Boot] RFC: getramsize() prototype and volatile qualifier
Message-ID: <4DAFD834.8010303@aribaud.net>
List-Id: <u-boot.lists.denx.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: u-boot@lists.denx.de

Hi all,

Call it a detail, but I see that get_ram_size() calls sometime qualify 
their argument as volatile and sometimes not, and this makes checkpatch 
complain that volatiles are Bad(tm), which I would like to get fixed.

The prototype for get_ram_size() in is

	long	get_ram_size  (volatile long *, long);

While I understand that the way get_ram_size() works, it needs to 
perform volatile *accesses* to addresses computed from its arguments, I 
don't see why it requires one of the arguments themselves to be volatile.

Am I missing something here, particularly about some toolchain requiring 
the argument to be volatile? I see no reason it should, but better safe 
than sorry.

Amicalement,
-- 
Albert.