[U-Boot] declaring and initializing variables

[Kim Phillips]

On Mon, 14 Oct 2013 12:05:52 -0700
York Sun <yorksun at freescale.com> wrote:

> On 10/07/2013 03:03 PM, Kim Phillips wrote:
> > On Mon, 30 Sep 2013 17:04:33 -0700
> > York Sun <yorksun at freescale.com> wrote:
> > 
> >> Kim, et al.,
> >>
> >> I know I have asked this before. Pardon me as I don't consider myself a
> >> savy programmer.
> >>
> >> I am cleaning up the DDR driver for mpc83xx, mpc85xx and mpc86xx. The
> >> question is the accetable formats of declaring and initializing variable
> >> at the same time. The variables are the ccsr register pointers. I have
> >> two formats here
> >>
> >> struct ccsr_ddr __iomem *ddr = (void *) CONFIG_FOO_ADDR;
> >> struct ccsr_ddr __iomem *ddr =
> >> 	(struct ccsr_ddr __iomem *) CONFIG_FOO_ADDR;
> >>
> >> You have told me the second format is preferred. I have been using this
> >> format since. But in practice, the second format is often too long and I
> >> have to wrap to next line. It's not a problem for new code. As I am
> >> trying to cleanup the existing code, I would have to make more changes.
> >> So I am back to this question. Is the first format (using void *)
> >> accetable in long term?
> > 
> > you're not running sparse, are you? :)
> > 
> > Use 'make C=1' or 'MAKEALL -C' when building u-boot.
> > 
> 
> I see what you mean. We have so many issue with existing code. Is it
> practical to enforce?

incrementally, i.e., for new patches, yes.  The notion of a separate
i/o address space is valid for checking u-boot source.  If existing
users want to update their code, that's fine too, they get the added
benefit.

Kim