From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tony Lindgren Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: OMAP4: PCM049: remove vusim regulator Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2011 03:59:20 -0700 Message-ID: <20110715105920.GU5783@atomide.com> References: <1310554738.18446.12.camel@lws-weitzel> <1310554762-10743-1-git-send-email-j.weitzel@phytec.de> <4E1D8BCD.5060901@ru.mvista.com> <1310561772.18446.14.camel@lws-weitzel> <20110714073445.GL5783@atomide.com> <1310632792.4008.3.camel@lws-weitzel> <20110715075024.GO5783@atomide.com> <20110715075825.GB2611@legolas.emea.dhcp.ti.com> <20110715082012.GR5783@atomide.com> <20110715083103.GF2611@legolas.emea.dhcp.ti.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from mho-03-ewr.mailhop.org ([204.13.248.66]:23275 "EHLO mho-01-ewr.mailhop.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S964787Ab1GOK70 (ORCPT ); Fri, 15 Jul 2011 06:59:26 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20110715083103.GF2611@legolas.emea.dhcp.ti.com> Sender: linux-omap-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org To: Felipe Balbi Cc: Jan Weitzel , linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, Sergei Shtylyov , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org * Felipe Balbi [110715 01:25]: > > possibly something like this (still missing MACHINE_START a few more > things): Yes and it would be better to initialize data in the .init_machine to avoid adding machine_is tests in multiple places. > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/board-omap4panda.c b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/board-omap4panda.c > index 0cfe200..dff174c 100644 > --- a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/board-omap4panda.c > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/board-omap4panda.c > @@ -681,20 +681,44 @@ void omap4_panda_display_init(void) > omap_display_init(&omap4_panda_dss_data); > } > > +static struct omap_smsc911x_platform_data board_smsc911x_data __initdata = { > + .cs = OMAP4_SMSC911X_ETH_CS, > + .gpio_irq = OMAP4_SMSC911X_ETH_GPIO_IRQ, > + .gpio_reset = -EINVAL, > + .flags = SMSC911X_USE_16BIT, > +}; > + > +static void __init omap4_panda_smsc91xx_init(void) > +{ > + if (!machine_is_pcm049()) > + return; > + > + omap_mux_init_gpio(OMAP4_PCM049_ETH_GPIO_IRQ, OMAP_PIN_INPUT); > + gpmc_smsc911x_init(&board_smsc911x_data); > +} > + > static void __init omap4_panda_init(void) > { > int package = OMAP_PACKAGE_CBS; > > if (omap_rev() == OMAP4430_REV_ES1_0) > package = OMAP_PACKAGE_CBL; > + > omap4_mux_init(board_mux, NULL, package); > > - if (wl12xx_set_platform_data(&omap_panda_wlan_data)) > - pr_err("error setting wl12xx data\n"); > + if (machine_is_omap4panda()) { > + int ret; > + > + ret = wl12xx_set_platform_data(&omap_panda_wlan_data); > + if (ret) > + pr_err("error setting wl12xx data\n"); > + > + platform_device_register(&omap_vwlan_device); > + } > > + omap4_panda_smsc91xx_init(); > omap4_panda_i2c_init(); > platform_add_devices(panda_devices, ARRAY_SIZE(panda_devices)); > - platform_device_register(&omap_vwlan_device); > board_serial_init(); > omap4_twl6030_hsmmc_init(mmc); So we sould have panda_common_init() and then omap4_panda_init() and omap4_phycore_init() or something like that. No need for machine_is tests then as the .machine_init already takes care of that test. Regards, Tony From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: tony@atomide.com (Tony Lindgren) Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2011 03:59:20 -0700 Subject: [PATCH] ARM: OMAP4: PCM049: remove vusim regulator In-Reply-To: <20110715083103.GF2611@legolas.emea.dhcp.ti.com> References: <1310554738.18446.12.camel@lws-weitzel> <1310554762-10743-1-git-send-email-j.weitzel@phytec.de> <4E1D8BCD.5060901@ru.mvista.com> <1310561772.18446.14.camel@lws-weitzel> <20110714073445.GL5783@atomide.com> <1310632792.4008.3.camel@lws-weitzel> <20110715075024.GO5783@atomide.com> <20110715075825.GB2611@legolas.emea.dhcp.ti.com> <20110715082012.GR5783@atomide.com> <20110715083103.GF2611@legolas.emea.dhcp.ti.com> Message-ID: <20110715105920.GU5783@atomide.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org * Felipe Balbi [110715 01:25]: > > possibly something like this (still missing MACHINE_START a few more > things): Yes and it would be better to initialize data in the .init_machine to avoid adding machine_is tests in multiple places. > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/board-omap4panda.c b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/board-omap4panda.c > index 0cfe200..dff174c 100644 > --- a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/board-omap4panda.c > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/board-omap4panda.c > @@ -681,20 +681,44 @@ void omap4_panda_display_init(void) > omap_display_init(&omap4_panda_dss_data); > } > > +static struct omap_smsc911x_platform_data board_smsc911x_data __initdata = { > + .cs = OMAP4_SMSC911X_ETH_CS, > + .gpio_irq = OMAP4_SMSC911X_ETH_GPIO_IRQ, > + .gpio_reset = -EINVAL, > + .flags = SMSC911X_USE_16BIT, > +}; > + > +static void __init omap4_panda_smsc91xx_init(void) > +{ > + if (!machine_is_pcm049()) > + return; > + > + omap_mux_init_gpio(OMAP4_PCM049_ETH_GPIO_IRQ, OMAP_PIN_INPUT); > + gpmc_smsc911x_init(&board_smsc911x_data); > +} > + > static void __init omap4_panda_init(void) > { > int package = OMAP_PACKAGE_CBS; > > if (omap_rev() == OMAP4430_REV_ES1_0) > package = OMAP_PACKAGE_CBL; > + > omap4_mux_init(board_mux, NULL, package); > > - if (wl12xx_set_platform_data(&omap_panda_wlan_data)) > - pr_err("error setting wl12xx data\n"); > + if (machine_is_omap4panda()) { > + int ret; > + > + ret = wl12xx_set_platform_data(&omap_panda_wlan_data); > + if (ret) > + pr_err("error setting wl12xx data\n"); > + > + platform_device_register(&omap_vwlan_device); > + } > > + omap4_panda_smsc91xx_init(); > omap4_panda_i2c_init(); > platform_add_devices(panda_devices, ARRAY_SIZE(panda_devices)); > - platform_device_register(&omap_vwlan_device); > board_serial_init(); > omap4_twl6030_hsmmc_init(mmc); So we sould have panda_common_init() and then omap4_panda_init() and omap4_phycore_init() or something like that. No need for machine_is tests then as the .machine_init already takes care of that test. Regards, Tony