[U-Boot] [PATCH v8] Marvell Kirkwood family SOC support

[Prafulla Wadaskar]

> ...
> > > > > +#define KW_EGIGA0_BASE			
> (KW_REGISTER(0x72000))
> > > > > +#define KW_EGIGA1_BASE			
> (KW_REGISTER(0x76000))
> > > > 
> > > > Use a C struct?
> > > These are the Base address referred by register structures.
> 
> I am aware of this.
> 
> > > Generally this type of declaration used for other cpu/socs.
> 
> Well, "generally" is a weak argument - you find examples for both.
> Coming from the PowerPC world, and haveing been using the 
> code these sinde > 10 years, I'm more accustomed to see 
> something like a big IMMR sturcture here.
> 
> > I have almost done with other changes except this one Do 
> this really 
> > need to be converted C struct?
> 
> No, you do not *have* to. That's why I asked it as a 
> question. If I had to write the code, I would use a C struct, 
> and I think it would be easier to read.
> 
> But I don't insist on such a change. You can find arguments 
> for both solutions, so decide what deems best for you.
Hi Wolfgang
There is always scope for improvements and one should do it.
Just to sync current kirkwood code with other arm architectures,
I will keep the registers offset definitions as it is.

I appreciate your suggestions, I will take care for future coding

Thanks and regards...
Prafulla . .