[U-Boot] [PATCH] BeagleBoard: Add a comment explaining the use of "OMAP34XX" macros.

[Robert P. J. Day <rpjday@crashcourse.ca>]

On Fri, 20 Nov 2009, M?ns Rullg?rd wrote:

> "Robert P. J. Day" <rpjday@crashcourse.ca> writes:
>
> > Make it clear to a reader that the user of OMAP34XX macros in the
> > (OMAP 3530-based) beagle config file is just fine.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Robert P. J. Day <rpjday@crashcourse.ca>
> >
> > ---
> >
> >   i'll let dirk be the judge as to whether this is worth adding, or if
> > he'd prefer a different phrasing.
> >
> > diff --git a/include/configs/omap3_beagle.h b/include/configs/omap3_beagle.h
> > index 19a5ec9..9a03587 100644
> > --- a/include/configs/omap3_beagle.h
> > +++ b/include/configs/omap3_beagle.h
> > @@ -30,6 +30,9 @@
> >
> >  /*
> >   * High Level Configuration Options
> > + *
> > + * Note that, although the BeagleBoard incorporates an OMAP 3530,
> > + * it's currently still valid to use OMAP34XX preprocessor values.
> >   */
> >  #define CONFIG_ARMCORTEXA8	1	/* This is an ARM V7 CPU core */
> >  #define CONFIG_OMAP		1	/* in a TI OMAP core */
>
> Since 34xx and 35xx are in fact exactly the same silicon, saying it is
> "currently" valid seems a bit odd.  This sort of implies a planned
> change.

  ok, i can rephrase that.  i was working off of a post by dirk a
couple days ago where he seemed to be suggesting that the door was
open for some divergence down the road, but maybe i just misread.
will fix shortly.

rday
--

========================================================================
Robert P. J. Day                               Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA

            Linux Consulting, Training and Kernel Pedantry.

Web page:                                          http://crashcourse.ca
Twitter:                                       http://twitter.com/rpjday
========================================================================