From: ext Tony Lindgren <tony@xxxxxxxxxxx> Subject: Re: [PATCH] OMAP3: mailbox initialization for all omap versions Date: Thu, 1 Apr 2010 11:52:04 +0200 > * Hiroshi DOYU <Hiroshi.DOYU@xxxxxxxxx> [100329 02:05]: >> From: "Balbi Felipe (Nokia-D/Helsinki)" <felipe.balbi@xxxxxxxxx> >> Subject: Re: [PATCH] OMAP3: mailbox initialization for all omap versions >> Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2010 09:01:45 +0200 >> > >> > in that case, wouldn't it be better to split that into >> > arch/arm/omap1/mbox.c arch/arm/omap2/mbox24xx.c >> > arch/arm/omap2/mbox34xx.c arch/arm/omap2/mbox44xx.c ?? >> > >> > that way we don't need ifdefs on the code and we will only compile what >> > we really need. >> >> This is feasible. >> But I'm not so sure whether adding 4 new files with around only 10 >> lines code is acceptable or not. >> >> Tony, any comment on the above? >> >> Basically there could be the case we need all resources if we want to >> support omap1, 2, 3 and 4 at the same time, and the appropriate one >> will be chosen at run time by CPUID. I'm not sure how mature "omap >> multi arch" support is practically, but it's better to keep it as much >> as possbile. > > I like Felipe's suggestion of adding devices2420.c, devices34xx.c, > devices44xx.c or similar. Then do the device init from those with > a arch_initcall that returns immediately if not running on the right > soc. Ok, let's procced with this. I'll post something later. -- 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
