Hi Paul,
diff --git a/cpu/mpc8xxx/ddr/util.c b/cpu/mpc8xxx/ddr/util.c index 4451989..d0f61a8 100644 --- a/cpu/mpc8xxx/ddr/util.c +++ b/cpu/mpc8xxx/ddr/util.c @@ -89,16 +89,16 @@ __fsl_ddr_set_lawbar(const common_timing_params_t *memctl_common_params, ? LAW_TRGT_IF_DDR_INTRLV : LAW_TRGT_IF_DDR_1;
if (set_ddr_laws(base, size, lawbar1_target_id) < 0) {
printf("ERROR\n");
printf("set_lawbar: ERROR (%d)\n", memctl_interleaved); return ;
printf("ERROR\n");
printf("set_lawbar: ERROR (ctrl #2)\n");
This error would print out #2 for the 2nd controller...
return ; }} else {
printf("unexpected controller number %u in %s\n",
printf("set_lawbar: unexpected controller number %u in %s\n", ctrl_num, __FUNCTION__);
But this error would print out 2 for the 3rd controller. Either convention is going to be confusing, but it'd be nice if they were at least consistent.
__func__ is preferred over __FUNCTION__, maybe you could update it also?
Wouldn't this message look at bit funny with the title being "set_lawbar:" but then also including the full "__fsl_ddr_set_lawbar" in the same message? And neither of the other errors include the printing of __func__? Hopefully I'll never see the errors, so proceed as you see fit:)
Best, Peter