> -----Original Message----- > From: linux-omap-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:linux-omap-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Paul > Walmsley > Sent: Thursday, January 21, 2010 8:57 AM > To: Pagare, Abhijit > Cc: tony@xxxxxxxxxxx; linux-omap@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Subject: RE: [PATCH] OMAP CPU ID: fix OMAP4 build failure > > Hello Abhijit, > > On Wed, 20 Jan 2010, Paul Walmsley wrote: > > > > So now it can be migrated from CHIP_IS_OMAP4430 to CHIP_IS_OMAP4430ES1. > > > I think CHIP_IS_OMAP4430 would be redundant in that case and should be > > > removed. A patch would be essential to take care of that in the places > > > where it is used. If you feel the same I can send a patch for fixing > > > this. > > > > In the past, there have been some clock, clockdomain, powerdomain, IP > > block, etc. changes going from ES1 to ES2 revisions. But most clocks, > > etc. stay the same. So it seems best to keep the actual CHIP_IS_* bits > > ES-level sensitive, then define a rollup macro like CHIP_IS_OMAP4430 for > > what stays the same. Until ES2 details are available, this shouldn't > > require any further changes to the codebase aside from id.c. > > I guess the rollup should probably be CHIP_IS_OMAP44XX. Do you happen to > know whether software will be able to discriminate between 4430 and 4440 > chips at run-time, and if so, what mechanism to use? ID_CODE would be different which can be used for this. -- 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
