On Wed, Oct 02, 2019 at 11:27:16AM -0500, Andrew Fish via Groups.Io wrote: > > > > On Oct 2, 2019, at 11:14 AM, Abner Chang <abner.ch...@hpe.com> wrote: > > > > Thanks Leif, let me check with maintainers. > > > > Hi Mike and Liming, > > How do you think about to use IoLibArm as the I/O lib instance for RISC-V > > arch? I personally don't like to use IoLibArm.c in [Source.RISCV64] > > section, instead I would like to use IoLibRiscV.c which conform with > > current source file organization under BaseIoLibIntrinsics. What's your > > preference? > > > > Abner, > > So is the plan to just copy IoLibArm.c to IoLibRiskV.c? I kind of > agree with Leif that having two copies of the same thing does not > make sense. I do see your point about naming, but maybe the issue > the IoLibArm.c name. I don't see anything ARM specific in > IoLibArm.c it seems to me it is generic C code for a platform that > does not have IO Ports. So I guess we could just change the file > name of IoLibArm.c to IoLibNoIo.c and have ARM and RISC-V point at > the common file?
Works for me. We can untangle the remaining mess unrelated from the Risc-V upstreaming. Best Regards, Leif -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#48384): https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/48384 Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/34258203/21656 Group Owner: devel+ow...@edk2.groups.io Unsubscribe: https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/unsub [arch...@mail-archive.com] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
