Dear Vadim Bendebury,
In message CAC3GErHaAGX39XjD04MnJWe3sa9XC087LLpf6SycVC6K7SLt6Q@mail.gmail.com you wrote:
- Copyright (c) 2011 The Chromium OS Authors. All rights reserved.
- Released under the 2-clause BSD license.
Are we ok with this ? Also, you say something about GPL in the same comment?
Can someone please tell me what needs to be put in the license headers and I will do it. I hear different suggestions from different people.
See previous comment - drop the BSD part if you include a GPLv2+ license header.
return ~0;Ugh, return 1 isn't ok ? Using ~0 on int type is weird.
I was under impression that any nonzero value is good. I see sometimes -1 returned for error in other u-boot sources. Also, I am sorry, I am new to this, when someone says "it is weird" - does this mean that it has to be changed?
Commands are running in some sort of shell environment. SO please return 0 for OK and 1 for general errors like all other commands do (or should do).
...
+static void report_error(const char *msg) +{
- if (msg && *msg)
Uhm, you also check if first character is non-zero? why ?
To avoid printing an empty string if someone calls this with an empty message?
It's your code, so just don't do it, then.
And what's wrong about printing an empty string? YOuy're just adding dead code (and increased memory footprint) here.
Two underscores aren't a good practice.
I did this as a result of a previous review. Do you have a suggestion how this should be done instead?
First, and most important, __u_boot_cmd_tpm appears to be undefined in your two patches, so it looks to be a real bug.
Second, please read the C standard's section about reserved identifiers.
Best regards,
Wolfgang Denk