Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > Maybe we should rather use the __raw_* variants in the cfi driver aswell > which is the only user of the functions below. We can do that for the sake of compatibility with Linux. > For some reason I > believed that the __raw_* variants also do little endian accesses which > is wrong. > I don't like the naming of the __raw_* variants very much as the > underscores and 'raw' suggests that these are internal functions which > one should rather not use, but in fact these are the correct functions > in most SoC (non PCI) drivers. Anyway, since Linux has this functions we > should use them aswell, everything else probably leads to more > confusion. I don't know. I would rename: __raw_* -> cpu_*() as they are just plain and simple accessors with native endianness. readl() and friends -> le32_readl() etc. The 'l' is somewhat redundant, the size is already determined by '32' (and 16, 8). Maybe le32_read() or read_le32()? Your call. We can just limit this renaming to cpu_* -> __raw_*. To be honest, I would like this stuff renamed in Linux as well. Perhaps some day. -- Krzysztof Halasa _______________________________________________ barebox mailing list barebox@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox
