[U-Boot] [PATCH V7 3/5] omap-common/spl: Add linux boot to SPL

[Tom Rini]

On Wednesday, December 7, 2011, Mike Frysinger <vapier at gentoo.org> wrote:
> On Wednesday 07 December 2011 20:09:13 Tom Rini wrote:
>> On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 5:50 PM, Mike Frysinger <vapier at gentoo.org> wrote:
>> > On Tuesday 06 December 2011 13:34:38 Simon Schwarz wrote:
>> >> --- a/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/omap-common/spl.c
>> >> +++ b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/omap-common/spl.c
>> >>
>> >> +void jump_to_image_linux(void *arg)
>> >> +{
>> >> ...
>> >> +}
>> >> +void jump_to_image_linux(void *) __attribute__ ((noreturn));
>> >
>> > no need for this.  do it in one line:
>> > __noreturn void jump_to_image_linux(void *arg)
>> > {
>> >        ...
>> > }
>> >
>> > (include linux/compiler.h if need be)
>>
>> Style?  I prefer the single line version myself but I've seen lots of
>> the long form when poking around before.
>
> i think it's a matter of people not knowing the subtle behavior of gcc
> attributes and func prototypes vs func definitions.
>
> i.e. they're used to seeing:
> void foo(void) __attribute__((...));
>
> so they try doing:
> void foo(void) __attribute__((...))
> {
> }
>
> which fails to build, so they get confused and just copy & paste the line
> twice since that works.  that's my biggest problem with this -- the manual
> duplication of the func signature.
>
> what they don't realize is you can do w/out duplication:
> void __attribute__((...)) foo(void)
> {
> }

Quite possible.  Wolfgang, is there a style thing here or would you like to
see all of the long form versions converted to the short form and use
<linux/compiler.h>?  If so I'll make a note on my todo list...  Thanks!

-- 
Tom

-- 
Tom