Corey Osgood <corey.osg...@gmail.com> writes: > I'm fully in agreement with Ron here. Lets fix whatever's broken so we > can let the compiler tell us when we make foolish mistakes, rather > then writing some mess that's sure to cause some WTFs down the road. > This is *one* instance in which someone used an 8-bit instead of a > 16-bit function by mistake. Lets not go nuts trying to idiot-proof > things. Instead of hacking away at all the pci functions, and almost > definitely causing some unintended breakage, can't we just pay a > little more attention during reviews?
Personally, I wouldn't implement this primarily to catch this particular foolish mistake. I think this makes sense on its own as a useful abstraction of a very common pattern that contains more redundancy than needed. The intent of the code becomes clearer and the signal-to-noise ratio increases. (Also, this has already snuck in, see for instance set_nbcfg_enable_bits in rs780_cmn.c: http://lxr.linux.no/#coreboot+r5917/src/southbridge/amd/rs780/rs780_cmn.c#L127 -- which I think is confusingly named, but which provides exactly this abstraction.) -- Arne. -- coreboot mailing list: coreboot@coreboot.org http://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot
