Hi Bob,
On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 10:43 AM, Bob Liu lliubbo@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 6:33 PM, Wolfgang Denk wd@denx.de wrote:
Dear Sonic Zhang,
In message 1360223258-6945-6-git-send-email-sonic.adi@gmail.com you wrote:
From: Bob Liu lliubbo@gmail.com
Bf60x support 16K, 64K, 16M and 64M cplb pages, this patch add support for them. So that bf609-ezkit can use it's 128M memory.
Checkpatch issues, please fix.
-#define CPLB_PAGE_SIZE (4 * 1024 * 1024) -#define CPLB_PAGE_MASK (~(CPLB_PAGE_SIZE - 1))
...
uint32_t cplb_page_size;uint32_t cplb_page_mask;...
cplb_page_size = (4 * 1024 * 1024);cplb_page_mask = (~(cplb_page_size - 1));...
mbase &= CPLB_PAGE_MASK;mend &= CPLB_PAGE_MASK;
mbase &= cplb_page_mask;mend &= cplb_page_mask;What exsactly is the reason for replacing a compile-time calculation with a run-time one?
Because bf60x will use different cplb page size in some place, if don't use run-time variable then more marco and #ifdef are needed. I prefer to reuse this code with run-time variable.
Thanks for explanation. I changed your run-time variable into new macro to avoid this problem.
Regards,
Sonic