From: Kevin Hilman <khilman@ti.com>
To: Vaibhav Hiremath <hvaibhav@ti.com>
Cc: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com>, Paul Walmsley <paul@pwsan.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: OMAP2+: am33xx: Make am33xx as a separate class
Date: Tue, 08 May 2012 14:57:14 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87ipg6l4jp.fsf@ti.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1336490630-7272-1-git-send-email-hvaibhav@ti.com> (Vaibhav Hiremath's message of "Tue, 8 May 2012 20:53:50 +0530")
Vaibhav Hiremath <hvaibhav@ti.com> writes:
> Initially, we decided to make am33xx family of device to fall
> under omap3 class (cpu_is_omap34xx() = true), since it carries
> Cortex-A8 core. But while adding complete baseport support
> (like, clock, power and hwmod) support, it is observed that,
> we are creating more and more problems by treating am33xx device
> as omap3 family, as nothing matches between them
> (except cortex-A8 mpu).
>
> So, after long discussion we have came to the conclusion that,
> we should not consider am33xx device as omap3 family, instead
> create separate class (SOC_OMAPAM33XX) under OMAP2PLUS.
> This means, for am33xx device, cpu_is_omap34xx() will return false,
> and only cpu_is_am33xx() will be true.
Not directly related to this patch, but does anyone have any objection
to dropping the OMAP from the SOC_ names for AM33xx and TI81XX?
I'll post a series shortly to do so.
Kevin
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: khilman@ti.com (Kevin Hilman)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH] ARM: OMAP2+: am33xx: Make am33xx as a separate class
Date: Tue, 08 May 2012 14:57:14 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87ipg6l4jp.fsf@ti.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1336490630-7272-1-git-send-email-hvaibhav@ti.com> (Vaibhav Hiremath's message of "Tue, 8 May 2012 20:53:50 +0530")
Vaibhav Hiremath <hvaibhav@ti.com> writes:
> Initially, we decided to make am33xx family of device to fall
> under omap3 class (cpu_is_omap34xx() = true), since it carries
> Cortex-A8 core. But while adding complete baseport support
> (like, clock, power and hwmod) support, it is observed that,
> we are creating more and more problems by treating am33xx device
> as omap3 family, as nothing matches between them
> (except cortex-A8 mpu).
>
> So, after long discussion we have came to the conclusion that,
> we should not consider am33xx device as omap3 family, instead
> create separate class (SOC_OMAPAM33XX) under OMAP2PLUS.
> This means, for am33xx device, cpu_is_omap34xx() will return false,
> and only cpu_is_am33xx() will be true.
Not directly related to this patch, but does anyone have any objection
to dropping the OMAP from the SOC_ names for AM33xx and TI81XX?
I'll post a series shortly to do so.
Kevin
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-05-08 21:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-05-08 15:23 [PATCH] ARM: OMAP2+: am33xx: Make am33xx as a separate class Vaibhav Hiremath
2012-05-08 15:23 ` Vaibhav Hiremath
2012-05-08 20:08 ` Tony Lindgren
2012-05-08 20:08 ` Tony Lindgren
2012-05-09 9:08 ` Hiremath, Vaibhav
2012-05-09 9:08 ` Hiremath, Vaibhav
2012-05-08 21:57 ` Kevin Hilman [this message]
2012-05-08 21:57 ` Kevin Hilman
2012-05-08 21:58 ` Tony Lindgren
2012-05-08 21:58 ` Tony Lindgren
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=87ipg6l4jp.fsf@ti.com \
--to=khilman@ti.com \
--cc=hvaibhav@ti.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-omap@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=paul@pwsan.com \
--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.