From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Nishanth Menon Subject: Re: [PATCH] omap: Add macros to evaluate cpu revision Date: Thu, 22 Jul 2010 04:38:13 -0500 Message-ID: <4C481185.3090005@ti.com> References: <1279725163-3481-1-git-send-email-premi@ti.com> <4C4710DB.6060901@ti.com> <5A47E75E594F054BAF48C5E4FC4B92AB0323B40084@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 bear.ext.ti.com ([192.94.94.41]:60274 "EHLO bear.ext.ti.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754668Ab0GVJiO (ORCPT ); Thu, 22 Jul 2010 05:38:14 -0400 Received: from dlep33.itg.ti.com ([157.170.170.112]) by bear.ext.ti.com (8.13.7/8.13.7) with ESMTP id o6M9cEqn030696 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Thu, 22 Jul 2010 04:38:14 -0500 Received: from dlep26.itg.ti.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dlep33.itg.ti.com (8.13.7/8.13.7) with ESMTP id o6M9cDqx012898 for ; Thu, 22 Jul 2010 04:38:13 -0500 (CDT) Received: from dlee73.ent.ti.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dlep26.itg.ti.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o6M9cDJn018257 for ; Thu, 22 Jul 2010 04:38:13 -0500 (CDT) In-Reply-To: <5A47E75E594F054BAF48C5E4FC4B92AB0323B40084@dbde02.ent.ti.com> Sender: linux-omap-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org To: "Gadiyar, Anand" Cc: "Premi, Sanjeev" , "linux-omap@vger.kernel.org" On 07/22/2010 01:53 AM, Gadiyar, Anand wrote: >>> @@ -460,4 +461,35 @@ OMAP3_HAS_FEATURE(isp, ISP) >>> OMAP3_HAS_FEATURE(192mhz_clk, 192MHZ_CLK) >>> OMAP3_HAS_FEATURE(io_wakeup, IO_WAKEUP) >>> >>> +/* >>> + * Map revision bits to silicon specific revisions >>> + */ >>> +#define ES_1_0 OMAP_REVBITS_00 >> probably need ES_1_1, 1_2 (considering 3630) > > > This should be okay, since the 3630 is out with > these revisions, but... > >>> +#define ES_2_0 OMAP_REVBITS_10 >>> +#define ES_2_1 OMAP_REVBITS_20 >> makes sense to go to 2_2 >>> +#define ES_3_0 OMAP_REVBITS_30 >>> +#define ES_3_1 OMAP_REVBITS_40 >>> +#define ES_3_1_2 OMAP_REVBITS_50 >> 3_2? > > This may not make sense to add now as there are no > 2.2 or 3.2 revisions of any OMAP3/4 silicon? > Agreed for 3 and 4, but considering this is arch/arm/plat-omap/include/plat/cpu.h, does it make sense in looking all OMAPs? Regards, Nishanth Menon