[coreboot] Inconsistent low-level arch functions between ARM and x86

So, I found this: ARM: static inline void write32(uint32_t val, void *addr) x86: static inline void write32(unsigned long addr, uint32_t value) Now, isn't a 4-byte memory write a 4-byte memory write independent of architecture? Forget about the fact that the x86 version takes an unsigned long i

Re: [coreboot] Inconsistent low-level arch functions between ARM and x86

The functions are wrong in two ways. on the x86 side, the addr should be a void *. Had we done this long ago we would have caught some bugs. On the ARM side, the addr should be first, not last, to be consistent with other "addr"s in coreboot (e.g. pci space). So we'd like to fix the argument orde

Re: [coreboot] Inconsistent low-level arch functions between ARM and x86

On Dec 29, 2013 7:17 PM, "ron minnich" wrote: > > The functions are wrong in two ways. > > on the x86 side, the addr should be a void *. Had we done this long > ago we would have caught some bugs. > > On the ARM side, the addr should be first, not last, to be consistent > with other "addr"s in cor