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 05:01:10 -0600 Message-ID: <4AFD3C76.4080902@ti.com> References: <1256826908-14703-1-git-send-email-premi@ti.com> <20091112222127.GF24837@atomide.com> <5A47E75E594F054BAF48C5E4FC4B92AB030A8C864A@dbde02.ent.ti.com> <4AFD31D3.6060805@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]:49441 "EHLO comal.ext.ti.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754876AbZKMLBF (ORCPT ); Fri, 13 Nov 2009 06:01:05 -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 04:53 AM, the following: >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Menon, Nishanth >> Sent: Friday, November 13, 2009 3:46 PM >> To: Premi, Sanjeev >> Cc: Gadiyar, Anand; Tony Lindgren; linux-omap@vger.kernel.org >> Subject: Re: [PATCH] omap3: Change the default silicon >> >> 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 ;).. > > Default != new si IMHO, I would rather have it as a BUG() instead of giving something default there.. essentially hitting that case points at: "hey here is a chip the programmers did not think about, let me be smart and try to dream up what they might be using" - lets face it, our code aint' that smart.. we have two options: a) Make a guess what it might be b) force the programmer to fix the bug and send us the patch ;).. just my 2 cents.. > >> 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 > > No issues with felipe's patch. It is cleaning the code style. > >> this -> in >> my opinion, hitting this condition is only because you have the next >> generation of devices.. > > Since we are talking OMAP3 derivatives, the default should be the > base - in case the condition ever arises. The fall back should > usually be 'most common' than 'latest'. > > ~sanjeev >> >> -- >> Regards, >> Nishanth Menon >> >> Ref: >> [1]: http://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/59540/ -- Regards, Nishanth Menon