Hi Paul, > diff --git a/cpu/mpc8xxx/ddr/util.c b/cpu/mpc8xxx/ddr/util.c > index 4451989..d0f61a8 100644 > --- a/cpu/mpc8xxx/ddr/util.c > +++ b/cpu/mpc8xxx/ddr/util.c > @@ -89,16 +89,16 @@ __fsl_ddr_set_lawbar(const common_timing_params_t > *memctl_common_params, > ? LAW_TRGT_IF_DDR_INTRLV : LAW_TRGT_IF_DDR_1; > > if (set_ddr_laws(base, size, lawbar1_target_id) < 0) { > - printf("ERROR\n"); > + printf("set_lawbar: ERROR (%d)\n", memctl_interleaved); > return ; > } > } else if (ctrl_num == 1) { > if (set_ddr_laws(base, size, LAW_TRGT_IF_DDR_2) < 0) { > - printf("ERROR\n"); > + printf("set_lawbar: ERROR (ctrl #2)\n");
This error would print out #2 for the 2nd controller... > return ; > } > } else { > - printf("unexpected controller number %u in %s\n", > + printf("set_lawbar: unexpected controller number %u in %s\n", > ctrl_num, __FUNCTION__); But this error would print out 2 for the 3rd controller. Either convention is going to be confusing, but it'd be nice if they were at least consistent. __func__ is preferred over __FUNCTION__, maybe you could update it also? Wouldn't this message look at bit funny with the title being "set_lawbar:" but then also including the full "__fsl_ddr_set_lawbar" in the same message? And neither of the other errors include the printing of __func__? Hopefully I'll never see the errors, so proceed as you see fit:) Best, Peter _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot