From: Nishanth Menon <nm@ti.com>
To: "Premi, Sanjeev" <premi@ti.com>
Cc: "Gadiyar, Anand" <gadiyar@ti.com>,
"linux-omap@vger.kernel.org" <linux-omap@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] omap: Add macros to evaluate cpu revision
Date: Thu, 22 Jul 2010 05:48:09 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4C4821E9.6030405@ti.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <B85A65D85D7EB246BE421B3FB0FBB59301E7C764FD@dbde02.ent.ti.com>
Premi, Sanjeev had written, on 07/22/2010 04:49 AM, the following:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Menon, Nishanth
>> Sent: Thursday, July 22, 2010 3:08 PM
>> To: Gadiyar, Anand
>> Cc: Premi, Sanjeev; linux-omap@vger.kernel.org
>> Subject: Re: [PATCH] omap: Add macros to evaluate cpu revision
>>
>> 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?
>
> In this case, the best option would be to prefix OMAP34X_/ OMAP36X_
> OMAP44X_ etc and define the ES revisions for each context.
doing that is gonna make the code real dirty looking. at the very least
mebbe bracket it in with #ifdef with CONFIG_OMAP2PLUS?
--
Regards,
Nishanth Menon
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-07-22 10:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-07-21 15:12 [PATCH] omap: Add macros to evaluate cpu revision Sanjeev Premi
2010-07-21 15:23 ` Nishanth Menon
2010-07-22 6:53 ` Gadiyar, Anand
2010-07-22 9:38 ` Nishanth Menon
2010-07-22 9:49 ` Premi, Sanjeev
2010-07-22 10:05 ` Shilimkar, Santosh
2010-07-22 10:48 ` Nishanth Menon [this message]
2010-07-22 11:20 ` Premi, Sanjeev
2010-07-22 11:46 ` Nishanth Menon
2010-07-22 12:10 ` Premi, Sanjeev
2010-07-26 15:27 ` Premi, Sanjeev
2010-08-12 14:51 ` Premi, Sanjeev
2010-08-16 13:23 ` Premi, Sanjeev
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4C4821E9.6030405@ti.com \
--to=nm@ti.com \
--cc=gadiyar@ti.com \
--cc=linux-omap@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=premi@ti.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox