Hi guys On Wed, 12 Aug 2009, Nayak, Rajendra wrote: > >From: Paul Walmsley [mailto:paul@xxxxxxxxx] > > > >On Wed, 12 Aug 2009, Shilimkar, Santosh wrote: > > > >> > I'd also like to see the full names of the PRCM submodules, e.g., > >> > > >> > OMAP4430_CM2_RESTORE_CM2_MOD > >> > > >> > rather than just > >> > > >> > OMAP4430_CM2_RESTORE_MOD > >> > >> Not sure what you mean by __full__ name here. You are adding > >a redundant CM2 in the name here. > > > >Yes, for the above example, it looks pretty redundant, doesn't > >it. But > >what about: > > > >OMAP4430_PRM_WKUP_CM_MOD > > There are only 2 such instances of these where in WKUP_CM and EMU_CM and > part of PRM module. There are no such instances in CM1 or CM2. To take > care of 2 of these we would have 60 odd which would look redundant and > module names as along as this OMAP4430_PRM_ALWAYS_ON_PRM_MOD. > > If its really confusing and hard to remember that these belong to PRM we > can always have exceptions in naming So, you propose that we have a rule here to drop the _{PRM,CM1,CM2} from the end of the PRCM subdomain name, if it is in the same "type" of PRCM module, e.g., drop the _PRM if it is in the PRM, _CM* if in a CM? So the first example, for CM2.RESTORE_CM2 would be: OMAP4430_CM2_RESTORE_MOD and the second example, for PRM.WKUP_CM would be: OMAP4430_PRM_WKUP_CM_MOD That particular rule seems basically okay to me. The redundancy does suck. It can be encoded in the autogeneration scripts easily. Any other comments/preferences on this from others in OMAP PM-land? > and we have had exceptions in 3430 as well. There are modules common to > 2430/3430 which are named differently as well as modules only in ES2 > which are named differently. Are you referring to the platform prefixes, e.g., OMAP3430ES2_USBHOST_MOD, or something else here? The platform prefixes strike me as a very different situation. For example, if you see accesses to an ES2 module in a 3430-wide code path, you know there is a problem, it sticks out like a sore thumb. Of course, even on OMAP2/3, looking back on it, we should have added some sort of PRCM notation in those defines, like OMAP3430ES2_PRCM_USBHOST_MOD, to mark that they are PRCM-specific defines ... - Paul -- 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
