Carl-Daniel Hailfinger wrote:
On 02.08.2008 16:50, Stefan Reinauer wrote:Index: src/arch/i386/lib/console_print.c =================================================================== --- src/arch/i386/lib/console_print.c (revision 3461) +++ src/arch/i386/lib/console_print.c (working copy) @@ -58,58 +58,59 @@ } }-#define NOINLINE __attribute__((noinline))-static void print_emerg_char(unsigned char byte) { __console_tx_char(BIOS_EMERG, byte); } -static void print_emerg_hex8(unsigned char value){ __console_tx_hex8(BIOS_EMERG, value); } -static void print_emerg_hex16(unsigned short value){ __console_tx_hex16(BIOS_EMERG, value); } -static void print_emerg_hex32(unsigned int value) { __console_tx_hex32(BIOS_EMERG, value); } -static void print_emerg(const char *str) { __console_tx_string(BIOS_EMERG, str); }+#define STATICI don't understand that change. You unconditionally define STATIC as empty token instead of simply removing it.
Yes, absolutely. Someone put it there and was thinking something.So this allows to put a method in place choosing when it would be required to really set those function prototypes static.
Stefan -- coresystems GmbH • Brahmsstr. 16 • D-79104 Freiburg i. Br. Tel.: +49 761 7668825 • Fax: +49 761 7664613 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] • http://www.coresystems.de/ Registergericht: Amtsgericht Freiburg • HRB 7656 Geschäftsführer: Stefan Reinauer • Ust-IdNr.: DE245674866
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
-- coreboot mailing list coreboot@coreboot.org http://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot