Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] ppc4xx: Support dual link OSD

Dear Dirk Eibach,

In message 1294662805-11704-3-git-send-email-eibach@gdsys.de you wrote:

#define BASE_WIDTH 32 @@ -38,12 +44,18 @@ enum { REG_CONTROL = 0x0010, REG_MPC3W_CONTROL = 0x001a,

• REG_EXT_INTERRUPT = 0x001c,
• REG_EXT_INTERRUPT_ENABLE = 0x001e,
• REG_IIC_WRITE_MAILBOX = 0x0030,
• REG_IIC_WRITE_MAILBOX_EXT = 0x0032,
• REG_IIC_READ_MAILBOX = 0x0034,
• REG_IIC_READ_MAILBOX_EXT = 0x0036, REG_VIDEOCONTROL = 0x0042,

• REG_OSDVERSION = 0x0100,
• REG_OSDFEATURES = 0x0102,
• REG_OSDCONTROL = 0x0104,
• REG_XY_SIZE = 0x0106,
• REG_VIDEOMEM = 0x0800,

• REG_OSDVERSION = CONFIG_SYS_FPGA_OSD_BASE + 0x0000,
• REG_OSDFEATURES = CONFIG_SYS_FPGA_OSD_BASE + 0x0002,
• REG_OSDCONTROL = CONFIG_SYS_FPGA_OSD_BASE + 0x0004,
• REG_XY_SIZE = CONFIG_SYS_FPGA_OSD_BASE + 0x0006,
• REG_VIDEOMEM = CONFIG_SYS_FPGA_OSD_MEM,

This has a certain smell to me - it smells like device accesses based on a base + offset notation, which is not waht we want to see. Why don't you use proper C structs instead to describe your devices?

Best regards,

Wolfgang Denk