From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Nishanth Menon Subject: Re: [PATCH] omap3: Change the default silicon Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2009 04:15:47 -0600 Message-ID: <4AFD31D3.6060805@ti.com> References: <1256826908-14703-1-git-send-email-premi@ti.com> <20091112222127.GF24837@atomide.com> <5A47E75E594F054BAF48C5E4FC4B92AB030A8C864A@dbde02.ent.ti.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from comal.ext.ti.com ([198.47.26.152]:47700 "EHLO comal.ext.ti.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755720AbZKMKPm (ORCPT ); Fri, 13 Nov 2009 05:15:42 -0500 In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-omap-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org To: "Premi, Sanjeev" Cc: "Gadiyar, Anand" , Tony Lindgren , "linux-omap@vger.kernel.org" Premi, Sanjeev had written, on 11/13/2009 04:10 AM, the following: >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Gadiyar, Anand >> Sent: Friday, November 13, 2009 10:41 AM >> To: Tony Lindgren; Premi, Sanjeev >> Cc: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org >> Subject: RE: [PATCH] omap3: Change the default silicon >> >> Tony Lindgren wrote: >>> * Sanjeev Premi [091029 07:35]: >>>> Currently the default silicon - in absence of >>>> identification - is set to OMAP3630 ES1.0. >>>> >>>> Though, condition may/should not arise; but >>>> the default should be latest in the most >>>> common silicon variant - currently OMAP3430 >>>> ES3.1. >>> Is this still needed? To me it seems more likely there will >>> more 3630 based silicon than 3430 based silicon? >>> >> 3430 ES3.1s are the most common I believe. All boards in the wild >> are 3430 based. >> >> 3630 is just coming up and will take a while to be as common. >> >> IMO, 3430 ES3.1 should be default. >> >> - Anand > > [sp] That's exactly the reason for this patch. > There is a small typo in the comment though :( > > /* Unknown. Default to latest among all variants */ > Should be: > /* Unknown. Default to common among all variants */ > > Sending a v2 for the same. > I believe this patch should be dropped -> here is why -> if you have new silicons that are in 3430 category, you should be sending patches for them ;).. The latest and greatest in the bucket of silicons is 3630 and I would rather go with felipe's patch [1] cleaning up the id.c than this -> in my opinion, hitting this condition is only because you have the next generation of devices.. -- Regards, Nishanth Menon Ref: [1]: http://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/59540/