On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 11:00 AM, Gregory Bean <gbean@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>>> Targets with the v2 block define CONFIG_MSM_V2_TLMM. >>>> >>>> So in that case we can name it as gpio-tlmm.c ?? >>> >>> No, not and have things be any clearer. >>> >>> All MSM chips have a TLMM block. The older chips have >>> version 1 (v1) of the TLMM block. The newer chips have v2. >> >> I think that we should differentiate the new gpio infrastructure with >> appropriate naming that makes the diff between v1 and v2 > > What do you suggest? All MSM SoCs have a TLMM block. The block itself > carries no model or revision name, and is not tied specifically to any > particular SoC, except for the fact that the second generation of this block > happened to appear at the same time as the MSM8x60. > > gpio.c is already in wide use for v1 systems, and is well-establised > in the android mainlines. Changing without extremely good cause would not > go pleasantly. > > Since gpio.c is v1, we used gpio-v2.c for v2. Greg, i agree your point ,but i think v2 differs from v1 with a new features distinguished.Also there might be a intention behind going for v2 that might resolve some hardware erratas in v1. what if again a new generation comes then we will name it gpio-v3.c ?? > > -- > Employee of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. > Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arm-msm" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
