Hi,
On 09/25/2015 02:08 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
On Fri, Sep 25, 2015 at 12:01:13PM +0200, Bastian Stender wrote:
Signed-off-by: Bastian Stender <bst@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap4-common.c | 6 ++++++
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap4-common.c b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap4-common.c
index 949696b..a3a0cd1 100644
--- a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap4-common.c
+++ b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap4-common.c
@@ -131,6 +131,12 @@ static int __init omap4_sram_init(void)
struct device_node *np;
struct gen_pool *sram_pool;
+ /* AM335x is OMAP2+, so no erratum I688 handling needed
+ * (see CONFIG_OMAP4_ERRATA_I688) needed
This makes no sense. OMAP4 is OMAP2+ as well, but it needs the erratum.
In fact, all code in mach-omap2 is "OMAP2+".
So, AM335x being "OMAP2+" is no reason at all why I688 should be disabled.
So, the Device Tree for AM335x does need a compatible = "ti,omap4-mpu"
node + sram property for I688 handling?
Please fix this comment. Please also put something in the commit message
which explains fully why you are making this change.
If this is the case, the patch is probably useless.
Regards,
Bastian
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
