From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Santosh Shilimkar Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/4] ARM: OMAP4+: PM: Consolidate OMAP4 PM code to re-use it for OMAP5 Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2013 11:47:15 +0530 Message-ID: <516503EB.8080805@ti.com> References: <1365166743-5940-1-git-send-email-santosh.shilimkar@ti.com> <1365166743-5940-3-git-send-email-santosh.shilimkar@ti.com> <20130405213433.GF10155@atomide.com> <5162A093.7090808@ti.com> <20130408164228.GK10155@atomide.com> <5163B19E.30105@ti.com> <20130409165503.GM10155@atomide.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from bear.ext.ti.com ([192.94.94.41]:54634 "EHLO bear.ext.ti.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751412Ab3DJGPP (ORCPT ); Wed, 10 Apr 2013 02:15:15 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20130409165503.GM10155@atomide.com> Sender: linux-omap-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org To: Tony Lindgren Cc: khilman@deeprootsystems.com, linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org On Tuesday 09 April 2013 10:25 PM, Tony Lindgren wrote: > * Santosh Shilimkar [130408 23:16]: >>> >> As I said, the IP has been there from OMAP2XX days. Here the case that >> IP version is very similar between OMAP4, OMAP5. DRA(next SOC) and its >> derivatives. Hence can share most of the code. I thought this was good >> enough reason considering at least 4 family of SOC's can make use >> of the code. > > Well at least that might be enough of a reasoning to rename it as > it is somewhat futureproof. > Yep. I can't see to much further in future but there is a *strong* mandate to not break compatibility so hopefully we won't see too much churn for similar IP blocks in future. >> It has nothing to do with SMP etc specifically and rather the similarity >> between the PM infrastructure on the mentioned SOCs. >> >> Let me know if you can suggested better name than what I chose ? > > Not really except something like pm-iprevXXX.[chS] where the rev is > the first revision that it works with? > > But then again if it's touching registers all over the place directly, > that naming does not make much sense either :) > Exactly. Thanks for the discussion. I will go ahead with rename when we add OMAP5 stuff like I did in earlier patch. i.e pm44xx.c --> pm_omap4plus.c sleep44xx.S --> sleep_omap4plus.S Regrads, Santosh