Allen, > depends on ARCH_OMAP3 && ARCH_OMAP34XX > > +config MACH_OMAP_3630SDP > + bool "OMAP 3630 SDP board" > + depends on ARCH_OMAP3 && ARCH_OMAP34XX & ARCH_OMAP36XX > + > config MACH_NOKIA_N8X0 > bool "Nokia N800/N810" > depends on ARCH_OMAP2420 > diff --git a/arch/arm/plat-omap/include/mach/cpu.h b/arch/arm/plat- > omap/include/mach/cpu.h > index 7a5f9e8..73c656c 100755 > --- a/arch/arm/plat-omap/include/mach/cpu.h > +++ b/arch/arm/plat-omap/include/mach/cpu.h > @@ -157,10 +157,12 @@ IS_OMAP_CLASS(15xx, 0x15) > IS_OMAP_CLASS(16xx, 0x16) > IS_OMAP_CLASS(24xx, 0x24) > IS_OMAP_CLASS(34xx, 0x34) > +IS_OMAP_CLASS(36xx, 0x36) ############################### OMAP3630 is "just" an OMAP3430 in disguise. I don't think it deserves a new class. It should probably be handled like it was done for 1610 and 1710. Theoretically, it should be considered as a 3430 ES4.0, because it is an OMAP3430 ES3 + couple of bug fixes + couple of improvements. I think, that the proposal from Sanjeev to support 35xx (http://marc.info/?l=linux-omap&m=125050987112798&w=2 ) might be leveraged to handle 36xx as well. ############################### I too second Benoit point here. A single runtime macro like "cpu_is_omap36xx()" should be good enough to add additional code for 3630. May be we can keep all 3430 switches by default enabled for 3630 and wherever necessary additional 3630 specific code can be added using the runtime switch like " cpu_is_omap36xx()". Regards, Santosh -- 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
