From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: kgene.kim@samsung.com (Kukjin Kim)
Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2010 17:50:52 +0900
Subject: [PATCH] s3c: add support for mini6410
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTimZXJeoq0TAeWJK5GkATAmb-OJCvtRczpLFHStf@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20100916172402.18683.30937.stgit@darius-desktop>
	<4C9FE082.4050808@fluff.org>
	<004d01cb5ed5$28505770$78f10650$%kim@samsung.com>
	<AANLkTimZXJeoq0TAeWJK5GkATAmb-OJCvtRczpLFHStf@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <006901cb5eea$4457e400$cd07ac00$%kim@samsung.com>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

Darius Augulis wrote:
> 
> On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 9:19 AM, Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com> wrote:
> > Ben Dooks wrote:
> >>
> >> On 16/09/10 18:24, Darius Augulis wrote:
> >> > Add support for mini6410 board from FriendlyARM
> >> >
> >> > Signed-off-by: Darius Augulis <augulis.darius@gmail.com>
> >> >
> >> > +obj-$(CONFIG_MACH_MINI6410) ? ? += mach-mini6410.o
> >> > ?obj-$(CONFIG_MACH_NCP) ? ? ? ? ? ? += mach-ncp.o
> >> > ?obj-$(CONFIG_MACH_HMT) ? ? ? ? ? ? += mach-hmt.o
> >> > ?obj-$(CONFIG_MACH_SMARTQ) ?+= mach-smartq.o
> >> > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-s3c64xx/mach-mini6410.c b/arch/arm/mach-
> >> s3c64xx/mach-mini6410.c
> >> > new file mode 100644
> >> > index 0000000..560e347
> >> > --- /dev/null
> >> > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-s3c64xx/mach-mini6410.c
> >> > @@ -0,0 +1,154 @@
> >> > +/* linux/arch/arm/mach-s3c64xx/mach-mini6410.c
> >> > + *
> >> > + * Copyright 2010 Darius Augulis <augulis.darius@gmail.com>
> >> > + * Copyright 2008 Openmoko, Inc.
> >> > + * Copyright 2008 Simtec Electronics
> >> > + * Ben Dooks <ben@simtec.co.uk>
> >> > + * http://armlinux.simtec.co.uk/
> >> > + *
> >> > + * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or
modify
> >> > + * it under the terms of the GNU General Public License version 2 as
> >> > + * published by the Free Software Foundation.
> >> > + *
> >> > +*/
> >>
> >> > +#include <linux/init.h>
> >> > +#include <linux/interrupt.h>
> >> > +#include <linux/gpio.h>
> >> > +#include <linux/kernel.h>
> >> > +#include <linux/list.h>
> >> > +#include <linux/dm9000.h>
> >> > +#include <linux/serial_core.h>
> >> > +#include <linux/types.h>
> >> > +#include <asm/mach-types.h>
> >> > +#include <asm/mach/arch.h>
> >> > +#include <asm/mach/map.h>
> >> > +#include <mach/map.h>
> >> > +#include <mach/regs-gpio.h>
> >> > +#include <mach/regs-srom.h>
> >> > +#include <mach/s3c6410.h>
> >> > +#include <plat/cpu.h>
> >> > +#include <plat/devs.h>
> >> > +#include <plat/regs-serial.h>
> >>
> >> My preference is to split up the include blocks with a blank line.
> >>
> >>
> >> > +#define UCON (S3C2410_UCON_DEFAULT | S3C2410_UCON_UCLK)
> >> > +#define ULCON (S3C2410_LCON_CS8 | S3C2410_LCON_PNONE |
> >> S3C2410_LCON_STOPB)
> >> > +#define UFCON (S3C2410_UFCON_RXTRIG8 |
> S3C2410_UFCON_FIFOMODE)
> >> > +
> >> > +static struct s3c2410_uartcfg mini6410_uartcfgs[] __initdata = {
> >> > + ? [0] = {
> >> > + ? ? ? ? ? .hwport = 0,
> >> > + ? ? ? ? ? .flags ?= 0,
> >> > + ? ? ? ? ? .ucon ? = UCON,
> >> > + ? ? ? ? ? .ulcon ?= ULCON,
> >> > + ? ? ? ? ? .ufcon ?= UFCON,
> >> > + ? },
> >> > + ? [1] = {
> >> > + ? ? ? ? ? .hwport = 1,
> >> > + ? ? ? ? ? .flags ?= 0,
> >> > + ? ? ? ? ? .ucon ? = UCON,
> >> > + ? ? ? ? ? .ulcon ?= ULCON,
> >> > + ? ? ? ? ? .ufcon ?= UFCON,
> >> > + ? },
> >> > + ? [2] = {
> >> > + ? ? ? ? ? .hwport = 2,
> >> > + ? ? ? ? ? .flags ?= 0,
> >> > + ? ? ? ? ? .ucon ? = UCON,
> >> > + ? ? ? ? ? .ulcon ?= ULCON,
> >> > + ? ? ? ? ? .ufcon ?= UFCON,
> >> > + ? },
> >> > + ? [3] = {
> >> > + ? ? ? ? ? .hwport = 3,
> >> > + ? ? ? ? ? .flags ?= 0,
> >> > + ? ? ? ? ? .ucon ? = UCON,
> >> > + ? ? ? ? ? .ulcon ?= ULCON,
> >> > + ? ? ? ? ? .ufcon ?= UFCON,
> >> > + ? },
> >> > +};
> >>
> >> I'm beginging to think we should just have a standard
> >> implementation of these.
> >>
> >> Otherwise looks good, up to myself and Kukjin to agree
> >> on who should merge.
> >
> > Ben, your tree is more suitable for this.
> > And if any s3c64xx stuff in my tree, will send to you.
> 
> I will soon resend a bit updated patch together with my other s3c64xx
> patches for-next. Would be better to merge all them at once because
> they depends on each other.
> 

As a note, it would be helpful to Ben and me, if you could use similar
format in the subject like following.
'ARM: S3C64XX: blah blah...'

You can also get the example with 'git log'.

Thanks.

Best regards,
Kgene.
--
Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com>, Senior Engineer,
SW Solution Development Team, Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.