On 03/25/2014 10:51 AM, Wolfgang Denk wrote: > Dear Stephen Warren, > > In message <5331a6b6.8090...@wwwdotorg.org> you wrote: >> >>> Or perhaps update_reg_mask_shift_val()? >> >> Still, I can rename the function if you want; it certainly does make it >> obvious. It's rather a long name though, but I guess wrapping the >> parameters isn't too bad. > > Please do not invent new bit manipulation functions. Just use the > standard I/O accessors. And whenever possible, please remove pre- > existing functions. > > I've just recently sent patches to get rid of such "inventions" that > resulted in undefined code.
That's not what this code is doing. The existing IO accessors are used; it's just removing duplication from the parameters passed to the existing functions (the shift needs to be written out twice). _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot