From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com (Thomas Petazzoni)
Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2014 14:19:58 +0200
Subject: [PATCH 2/4] ARM: mvebu: Move SCU power up in a function
In-Reply-To: <544A41E5.2090802@free-electrons.com>
References: <1414088070-12510-1-git-send-email-gregory.clement@free-electrons.com>
 <1414088070-12510-3-git-send-email-gregory.clement@free-electrons.com>
 <20141024140551.0890f204@free-electrons.com>
 <544A41E5.2090802@free-electrons.com>
Message-ID: <20141024141958.319af5d3@free-electrons.com>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

Dear Gregory CLEMENT,

On Fri, 24 Oct 2014 14:11:17 +0200, Gregory CLEMENT wrote:

> > Since this function is not static, I think it might be a good idea to
> > use a prefix that makes it more specific to the platform in order to
> > not pollute the global namespace. Maybe something like
> > 'armada_38x_scu_power_up', or something like that.
> 
> Yes given the fact that this function is declared in the mach-mveu folder
> it is sensible to use a more specific name. However the function itself
> is not specific at all to an SoC. This function could be used for any Cortex A9
> using the SCU.

Indeed, but as you say, it's right now defined in the mvebu specific
code, so we shouldn't pollute the global namespace.

Note that there is already a scu_power_mode() that does the same thing,
but implemented in C, so I'm not sure you can call it at search an early
point.

Best regards,

Thomas
-- 
Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Free Electrons
Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering
http://free-electrons.com