From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] silicon revision check for OMAP2/3
Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2007 04:59:52 -0700
Message-ID: <20071101115951.GD20403@atomide.com>
References: <000d01c817e2$90dd0230$6a8918ac@ent.ti.com>
	<20071026175224.GA5457@intune.research.nokia.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Return-path: <linux-omap-open-source-bounces@linux.omap.com>
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20071026175224.GA5457@intune.research.nokia.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://linux.omap.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-omap-open-source>,
	<mailto:linux-omap-open-source-request@linux.omap.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://linux.omap.com/pipermail/linux-omap-open-source>
List-Post: <mailto:linux-omap-open-source@linux.omap.com>
List-Help: <mailto:linux-omap-open-source-request@linux.omap.com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://linux.omap.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-omap-open-source>,
	<mailto:linux-omap-open-source-request@linux.omap.com?subject=subscribe>
Sender: linux-omap-open-source-bounces@linux.omap.com
Errors-To: linux-omap-open-source-bounces@linux.omap.com
To: Daniel Stone <daniel.stone@nokia.com>
Cc: linux-omap-open-source@linux.omap.com
List-Id: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org

* Daniel Stone <daniel.stone@nokia.com> [071026 10:53]:
> On Fri, Oct 26, 2007 at 08:42:03PM +0530, ext Girish wrote:
> > +#define is_sil_rev_greater_than(rev) \
> > +		(((((system_rev & 0xffff0000) >> 16) == \
> > +		((rev & 0xffff0000) >> 16)) && 	\
> > +		(system_rev & 0xf000) >> 12) > ((rev & 0xf000) >> 12))
> > +#define is_sil_rev_less_than(rev) \
> > +		(((((system_rev & 0xffff0000) >> 16) == \
> > +		((rev & 0xffff0000) >> 16)) && 	\
> > +		(system_rev & 0xf000) >> 12) < ((rev & 0xf000) >> 12))
> > +#define is_sil_rev_equal_to(rev) \
> > +		(((((system_rev & 0xffff0000) >> 16) ==	\
> > +		((rev & 0xffff0000) >> 16)) && \
> > +		(system_rev & 0xf000) >> 12) == ((rev & 0xf000) >> 12))
> > +#define get_sil_rev() \
> > +		((system_rev & 0xf000) >> 12)
> 
> Hi,
> Just for code clarity, you could use (taking is_sil_rev_greater_than as
> an example):
> #define is_sil_rev_greater_than(rev) \
>                 ((system_rev & 0xffff0000) == (rev & 0xffff0000) && \
>                  (system_rev & 0x0000f000) == (rev & 0x0000f000))
> 
> You don't need the extra shifts in the comparison.  But, even better,
> you could use:
> #define get_sil_generation(rev) ((rev & 0xffff0000) >> 16)
> #define get_sil_revision(rev) ((rev & 0x00000f000) >> 12)
> #define is_sil_rev_greater_than(rev) \
>                 ((get_sil_generation(system_rev) == \
>                   get_sil_generation(rev)) && \
>                  (get_sil_revision(system_rev) >
>                   get_sil_revision(rev)))
> 
> and likewise for all the rest.

Let's not apply the first one either before this is updated as it will
break booting for 3430.

Tony