RE: [PATCH 0/5] Clean up omap24xx.h symbolic constants

Syed Mohammed, Khasim
2007-05-17T17:53:44Z

Hi:

IMHO, using of SDRC_BASE as well as CTRL_BASE, PRCM_BASE etc.,
>> can lead to name collision, the names is not so unique as may
>> seem. I suggest using of OMAP_ prefix for these names.
>
>Good point. We could use OMAP_ prefix and in case of conflicts
>with omap1 defines, we could rename them to have OMAP1_ prefix.
>

When we started with 3430 developments we had similar issues. Our approach was,

OMAP3_prefix : If the Macro is defined and valid for 3430 only
OMAP2_prefix : If its valid only for OMAP2
OMAP242x_prefix : for 2420 specific
OMAP243x_prefix : for 2430 specific
OMAP1_prefix : for all OMAP1 platforms, but we didn't change any, thinking it might break previous programs.
OMAP_prefix : Generic for all OMAP platforms.

It's better if we follow some kind of standard and pass it as a review comment for any patches from now on.

Other alternative is to use Peripheral version in OMAP. Example:

OMAP1 has DMA version 3
OMAP2 has DMA version 4
OMAP3 has DMA version 4

So define a macro for DMA as

OMAP_DMA3_yyyyyy : for all OMAPs where DMA version 3 is used (like OMAPV1030, OMAP1710, OMAP1610, etc)

OMAP_DMA4_yyyyyy : for all OMAPs where DMA version 4 is used (like OMAP3430 2430 2420, etc).

Similar thing can be adopted for SPI, McBSP, I2C, and other peripherals of OMAP.

Regards,
Khasim