From: Santosh Shilimkar <santosh.shilimkar@ti.com>
To: balbi@ti.com
Cc: khilman@deeprootsystems.com, tony@atomide.com,
linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/4] ARM: OMAP4+: PM: Consolidate MPU subsystem PM code for re-use
Date: Fri, 5 Apr 2013 19:07:57 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <515ED3B5.2040502@ti.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130405131935.GM11464@arwen.pp.htv.fi>
On Friday 05 April 2013 06:49 PM, Felipe Balbi wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 05, 2013 at 06:29:00PM +0530, Santosh Shilimkar wrote:
>> OMAP5 and future OMAP based SOCs has backward compatible MPUSS
>> IP block with OMAP4. It's programming model is mostly similar.
>
> s/It's/Its/
> s/mostly //
>
> (similar already expands to 'almost the same' :-)
>
>> @@ -355,6 +389,12 @@ int __init omap4_mpuss_init(void)
>>
>> save_l2x0_context();
>>
>> + if (cpu_is_omap44xx()) {
>> + omap_pm_ops.finish_suspend = omap4_finish_suspend;
>> + omap_pm_ops.resume = omap4_cpu_resume;
>> + omap_pm_ops.scu_prepare = scu_pwrst_prepare;
>> + }
>
> why don't you just rename omap4_* into omap_* and add cpu-based checks
> there in order to handle differences between omap4 and omap5?
>
The whole idea is to handle all these SOC specific stuff in init and
not sprinkle the checks in runtime code.
> If implementation will be almost the same for both, you might be able to
> save on some more duplication, no ?
>
The implementation is not same and hence. If it was same, I wouldn't
have introduced function pointers :)
Regards,
Santosh
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: santosh.shilimkar@ti.com (Santosh Shilimkar)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH v3 1/4] ARM: OMAP4+: PM: Consolidate MPU subsystem PM code for re-use
Date: Fri, 5 Apr 2013 19:07:57 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <515ED3B5.2040502@ti.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130405131935.GM11464@arwen.pp.htv.fi>
On Friday 05 April 2013 06:49 PM, Felipe Balbi wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 05, 2013 at 06:29:00PM +0530, Santosh Shilimkar wrote:
>> OMAP5 and future OMAP based SOCs has backward compatible MPUSS
>> IP block with OMAP4. It's programming model is mostly similar.
>
> s/It's/Its/
> s/mostly //
>
> (similar already expands to 'almost the same' :-)
>
>> @@ -355,6 +389,12 @@ int __init omap4_mpuss_init(void)
>>
>> save_l2x0_context();
>>
>> + if (cpu_is_omap44xx()) {
>> + omap_pm_ops.finish_suspend = omap4_finish_suspend;
>> + omap_pm_ops.resume = omap4_cpu_resume;
>> + omap_pm_ops.scu_prepare = scu_pwrst_prepare;
>> + }
>
> why don't you just rename omap4_* into omap_* and add cpu-based checks
> there in order to handle differences between omap4 and omap5?
>
The whole idea is to handle all these SOC specific stuff in init and
not sprinkle the checks in runtime code.
> If implementation will be almost the same for both, you might be able to
> save on some more duplication, no ?
>
The implementation is not same and hence. If it was same, I wouldn't
have introduced function pointers :)
Regards,
Santosh
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-04-05 13:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 46+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-04-05 12:58 [PATCH v3 0/4] ARM: OMAP4+: PM: Consolidate code for re-use on OMAP5 Santosh Shilimkar
2013-04-05 12:58 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2013-04-05 12:59 ` [PATCH v3 1/4] ARM: OMAP4+: PM: Consolidate MPU subsystem PM code for re-use Santosh Shilimkar
2013-04-05 12:59 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2013-04-05 13:19 ` Felipe Balbi
2013-04-05 13:19 ` Felipe Balbi
2013-04-05 13:35 ` Nishanth Menon
2013-04-05 13:35 ` Nishanth Menon
2013-04-05 13:39 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2013-04-05 13:39 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2013-04-05 14:04 ` Felipe Balbi
2013-04-05 14:04 ` Felipe Balbi
2013-04-05 14:18 ` Nishanth Menon
2013-04-05 14:18 ` Nishanth Menon
2013-04-05 14:29 ` Felipe Balbi
2013-04-05 14:29 ` Felipe Balbi
2013-04-05 13:37 ` Santosh Shilimkar [this message]
2013-04-05 13:37 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2013-04-05 12:59 ` [PATCH v3 2/4] ARM: OMAP4+: PM: Consolidate OMAP4 PM code to re-use it for OMAP5 Santosh Shilimkar
2013-04-05 12:59 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2013-04-05 13:21 ` Felipe Balbi
2013-04-05 13:21 ` Felipe Balbi
2013-04-05 13:35 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2013-04-05 13:35 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2013-04-05 21:34 ` Tony Lindgren
2013-04-05 21:34 ` Tony Lindgren
2013-04-08 10:48 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2013-04-08 10:48 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2013-04-08 16:42 ` Tony Lindgren
2013-04-08 16:42 ` Tony Lindgren
2013-04-09 6:13 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2013-04-09 6:13 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2013-04-09 16:55 ` Tony Lindgren
2013-04-09 16:55 ` Tony Lindgren
2013-04-10 6:17 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2013-04-10 6:17 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2013-04-05 12:59 ` [PATCH v3 3/4] ARM: OMAP4+: Make secondary_startup function name more consistent Santosh Shilimkar
2013-04-05 12:59 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2013-04-05 12:59 ` [PATCH v3 4/4] ARM: OMAP4+: CPUidle: Consolidate idle driver for OMAP5 support Santosh Shilimkar
2013-04-05 12:59 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2013-04-05 21:29 ` Kevin Hilman
2013-04-05 21:29 ` Kevin Hilman
2013-04-05 23:42 ` [PATCH v3 0/4] ARM: OMAP4+: PM: Consolidate code for re-use on OMAP5 Kevin Hilman
2013-04-05 23:42 ` Kevin Hilman
2013-04-08 11:03 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2013-04-08 11:03 ` Santosh Shilimkar
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=515ED3B5.2040502@ti.com \
--to=santosh.shilimkar@ti.com \
--cc=balbi@ti.com \
--cc=khilman@deeprootsystems.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-omap@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tony@atomide.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.