On 02/04/2013 04:19 PM, Albert ARIBAUD wrote:
Hi Nikita,
On Mon, 04 Feb 2013 14:37:06 +0200, Nikita Kiryanov nikita@compulab.co.il wrote:
Hi Albert,
On 02/04/2013 01:57 PM, Albert ARIBAUD wrote:
IIRC, you has submitted a fix so that BMP loads would result in correctly aligned fields and thus no need for accessors. Why this change of mind?
I did mention that I consider that fix as temporary. I believe this fix is better because it addresses the issue everywhere and does so in a more maintainable way (does not require the address fix to be duplicated everywhere there is a problem).
I actually like the new fix less, as it adds an API where there is no need of one -- it's not like the implementation of BMP is at risk of changing. What is the problem in fixing the load address at load time and then passing this fixed address around?
The problem is that it makes the U-Boot display subsystems broken in terms of what kind of programming interface they provide. The load address fix has to be applied in every code path that leads to a BMP being loaded and read in memory. This means that anyone who wants to implement some BMP related functionality needs to care about this architecture/memory issue, and actively circumvent it. This isn't good design. If I'm manipulating BMPs I should only care about my BMPs, not hardware issues.
Amicalement,