From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: sshtylyov@mvista.com (Sergei Shtylyov) Date: Tue, 06 Dec 2011 15:40:25 +0400 Subject: [PATCH] ARM: davinci: dm368 evm: add support for CPLD version specific cpu_is_* macro In-Reply-To: <1323168359-17943-1-git-send-email-prakash.pm@ti.com> References: <1323168359-17943-1-git-send-email-prakash.pm@ti.com> Message-ID: <4EDDFF29.1020009@mvista.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org Hello. On 06-12-2011 14:45, Manjunathappa, Prakash wrote: > From: Rajashekhara, Sudhakar > DM368 and DM365 EVMs have different CPLD versions. This patch > adds function which differentiates DM368 from DM365 EVMs. > Signed-off-by: Rajashekhara, Sudhakar > --- > arch/arm/mach-davinci/include/mach/common.h | 1 + > arch/arm/mach-davinci/include/mach/cputype.h | 11 +++++++++++ > 2 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-davinci/include/mach/common.h b/arch/arm/mach-davinci/include/mach/common.h > index a57cba2..f89cd2a 100644 > --- a/arch/arm/mach-davinci/include/mach/common.h > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-davinci/include/mach/common.h > @@ -52,6 +52,7 @@ struct davinci_soc_info { > u32 cpu_id; > u32 jtag_id; > u32 jtag_id_reg; > + u8 cpld_version; Come on, CPLD is not a part of a SoC and the structure is called *davinci_soc_info*. > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-davinci/include/mach/cputype.h b/arch/arm/mach-davinci/include/mach/cputype.h > index 957fb87..ef02ab1 100644 > --- a/arch/arm/mach-davinci/include/mach/cputype.h > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-davinci/include/mach/cputype.h > @@ -49,6 +49,15 @@ IS_DAVINCI_CPU(da830, DAVINCI_CPU_ID_DA830) > IS_DAVINCI_CPU(da850, DAVINCI_CPU_ID_DA850) > IS_DAVINCI_CPU(tnetv107x, DAVINCI_CPU_ID_TNETV107X) > > +#define IS_DAVINCI_CPU_CPLD_VER(type, id, cpld_ver) \ > +static inline int is_davinci_ ##type(void) \ > +{ \ > + return ((davinci_soc_info.cpu_id == (id))&& \ > + (davinci_soc_info.cpld_version == (cpld_ver))); \ > +} > + > +IS_DAVINCI_CPU_CPLD_VER(dm368, DAVINCI_CPU_ID_DM365, 0x21) > + If DM365 is indistinguishable from DM368 except when being on an EVM board, so be it. WBR, Sergei