[PATCH] first in a series to enhance microcode patches
Robert P. J. Day
rpjday at mindspring.com
Wed Oct 6 23:30:51 EST 2004
On Tue, 5 Oct 2004, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> In message <Pine.LNX.4.60.0410051543230.3549 at localhost.localdomain> you wrote:
>>
>> that's definitely understandable. it's just potentially confusing to
>> have a structure's reserved chunks declared as some combination of
>> uchar, ushort, uint and/or ulong, when it's obviously more
>> comprehensible to make each reserved chunk a standard array of char
>> whose size is obvious at a glance.
>
> Actually this might not be confusing, but making the code easier to
> read, to understand, and maybe one day to extend - remember that
> these struct definitions are direct translations of Motorola provided
> documentation - and I tend to believe that the chip manufacturer
> knows more about the internals of his chips than you or me. One day,
> a "uint reserved_xxx;" may turn into a new, shiny 32 bit register.
from "Documentation/SubmittingPatches", at the very end:
4) Don't over-design.
Don't try to anticipate nebulous future cases which may or may not
be useful: "Make it as simple as you can, and no simpler"
it seems that, if that's good advice for patches, it should be good
advice for the code proper. i do appreciate your point, but if at
some point, a shiny new register suddenly appears, that strikes me as
a significant enough change that mods to the header file shouldn't be
considered a big deal.
anyway, just my $0.02.
rday
More information about the Linuxppc-embedded
mailing list