From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Stephen Warren Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2015 09:06:06 -0700 Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH] arc: add stubs for map_physmem() and unmap_physmem() In-Reply-To: <1447422011.5262.7.camel@synopsys.com> References: <1447365381-16342-1-git-send-email-abrodkin@synopsys.com> <56451A1D.3080104@wwwdotorg.org> <1447422011.5262.7.camel@synopsys.com> Message-ID: <56460A6E.4030106@wwwdotorg.org> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de On 11/13/2015 06:40 AM, Alexey Brodkin wrote: > Hi Stephen, > > On Thu, 2015-11-12 at 16:00 -0700, Stephen Warren wrote: >> On 11/12/2015 02:56 PM, Alexey Brodkin wrote: >>> Up until now there was no need in those stubs. >>> >>> But since following commit compilation of U-Boot on ARC is broken: >>> commit 7861204c9af7fec1ea9b41541c272516235a6c93 >>> itest: make memory access work under sandbox >>> >> ... >>> That's because CMD_ITEST is enabled by default in common/Kconfig and now >>> map_physmem()/unmap_physmem() is used there. >>> >>> So this patch adds missing stubs for ARC. >> >> This looks OK, but rather than cut/pasting this exact same code yet >> another time, why not create e.g. include/io-base.h that contains this, >> and share it amongst all architectures? > > I did think about that. > > But the problem is "asm/io.h" is included in lots of sources and > it's hard to tell a reason for that inclusion - if it's only because of > map_physmem() or other stuff that might exist in the same header. > > For example lots of accessors are described in the same "asm/io.h" like > readl(), writeb() etc. > > Frankly I'd prefer in that particular case to limit a change to my > architecture. > > Still thoughts are welcome. FWIW, I expected all the existing to simply include that new header in place of the duplicated code. Certainly, going through the entire source tree and adding #include statements for that new header would not be a good approach.