Hi Sam, On 2/4/19 19:25, Sam Ravnborg wrote: > Hi Ahmad. > > On Mon, Apr 01, 2019 at 12:18:12PM +0200, Ahmad Fatoum wrote: >> Instead of adding missing definitions to the existing at91sam9_ddrsdr.h >> and adapting the incoming DDRAM initialization code from at91bootstrap, >> just replace the lightly used existing header with: >> https://github.com/linux4sam/at91bootstrap/blob/v3.8.12/include/arch/at91_ddrsdrc.h >> >> For easier comprehension, the replacement is done in three steps: >> This last step copies the memory size querying functions from at91sam9_ddrsdr.h >> to at91_ddrsdrc.h, then deletes it and fixes all references. >> >> Signed-off-by: Ahmad Fatoum <a.fatoum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> --- > > >> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-at91/include/mach/at91_ddrsdrc.h b/arch/arm/mach-at91/include/mach/at91_ddrsdrc.h >> index 57d0d8f489c4..7e68e7dd63eb 100644 >> --- a/arch/arm/mach-at91/include/mach/at91_ddrsdrc.h >> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-at91/include/mach/at91_ddrsdrc.h >> @@ -285,4 +285,48 @@ >> #define AT91C_DDRC2_WPVS (0x1UL << 0) >> #define AT91C_DDRC2_WPSRC (0xFFFFUL << 8) >> >> +#ifndef __ASSEMBLY__ >> +#include <common.h> >> +#include <io.h> >> + >> +static inline u32 at91_get_ddram_size(void * __iomem base, bool is_nb) >> +{ > > I should have brought this up in the previous patch-set, but it continue to itch me. > So you get the feedback here.... > > We have at91_get_ddram_size(IOMEM(xxx), {true or false}) > > If we introduced the following small helpers we could simplify the call sites > to just use at91_get_ddram_size(AT91SAM9G45_BASE_DDRSDRC0) and similar. > > static inline u32 at91_get_ddram_size(void __force __iomem * addr) > { > return __at91_get_ddram_size(IOMEM(addr), true); > } > > static inline u32 at91sam9g45_get_ddram_size(void __force __iomem * addr) > { > return __at91_get_ddram_size(IOMEM(addr), false); > } That would still require the pointer cast to pacify the -Wint-conversion. And (void*)ADDR looks only marginally better IOMEM(ADDR) IMO at the cost of having sparse miss passing memory pointers (__force __iomem would be equivalent to just __attribute__((noderef)), wouldn't it?) My preference would've been that AT91SAM9G45_BASE_DDRSDRC0 already expands to a void __iomem *. We could do that in a follow-up patch. > > But then for the few call sites it is not really worth it anyway. > Anyway, just a small itch. Just ignore it. > > Sam > -- Pengutronix e.K. | | Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ | Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 | Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 | _______________________________________________ barebox mailing list barebox@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox
