* Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> [090516 03:12]:
> On Thu, May 07, 2009 at 11:59:14AM +0530, Santosh Shilimkar wrote:
> > @@ -196,7 +199,10 @@ void __init omap2_check_revision(void)
> > * At this point we have an idea about the processor revision set
> > * earlier with omap2_set_globals_tap().
> > */
> > - if (cpu_is_omap24xx())
> > + if (cpu_is_omap44xx()) {
> > + printk(KERN_INFO "FIXME: CPU revision = OMAP4430\n");
> > + return;
> > + } else if (cpu_is_omap24xx())
>
> Can we keep things here in numeric order? So leave cpu_is_omap24xx()
> at the top and add the additional omap44xx stuff at the bottoom.
>
> > @@ -30,7 +32,9 @@
> > #include <mach/sdrc.h>
> > #include <mach/gpmc.h>
> >
> > +#ifndef CONFIG_ARCH_OMAP4 /* FIXME: Remove this once clkdev is ready */
> > #include "clock.h"
> > +#endif
>
> Hmm. Tony: we really need to eliminate data inside header files. It's
> not nice to have data structures created by merely including some header
> file that also contains function prototypes.
Yeh, we should just move the clocks from clock24xx.h to the top of clock24xx.c,
and the same thing for clock34xx.h. I think those are the only remaining
places with data in header files.
Regards,
Tony
--
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
