Re: FEATURES prints

[Kevin Hilman <khilman@deeprootsystems.com>]

Shilimkar, Santosh wrote:
> Sanjeev,
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: linux-omap-owner@vger.kernel.org [mailto:linux-omap-
>> owner@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Premi, Sanjeev
>> Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2009 3:26 AM
>> To: Kevin Hilman; Menon, Nishanth
>> Cc: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org
>> Subject: RE: FEATURES prints
>>
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Kevin Hilman [mailto:khilman@deeprootsystems.com]
>>> Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2009 3:17 AM
>>> To: Menon, Nishanth
>>> Cc: Premi, Sanjeev; linux-omap@vger.kernel.org
>>> Subject: Re: FEATURES prints
>>>
>>> Nishanth Menon <nm@ti.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> Folks,
>>>>
>>>> With the addition of FEATURES in l-o, the following prints:
>>>>  - l2cache : Y
>>>>  - iva : Y
>>>>  - sgx : Y
>>>>  - neon : Y
>>>>  - isp : Y
>>>>
>>>> comes up on SDP3430 -> now that we will introduce half a dozen
>>>> features here and there, we will soon clutter this up. we should
>>>> introduce a sysfs entry + remove the above noise..
>>>>
>>> Like Nishanth, I don't like the multi-line noise here.  The patch
>>> below results in a single line output like this instead
>>>
>>> OMAP3430/3530 ES3.0 (l2cache iva sgx neon isp )
>>>
>>> Not sure why we need to dump features that are not there, but if that
>>> s considered important, maybe prefixing each feature with a '+' or '-'
>>> would still allow this to be collapsed into a single line.
>>>
>>> Even with this, I think adding the display of these features into an
>>> OMAP-specific section of /proc/cpuinfo would be even better.
>>>
>> [sp] Single line prints look good. We can also add details in cpuinfo.
> 
> If you are ok with proc entry then we don't even need this noise at all in the boot. It's just that adding proc entries is discouraged to some extent.

FWIW, I was not thinking adding a new proc entry.  I was thinking of 
extending  /proc/cpuinfo with some platform specific entries.

Kevin