Paul Walmsley <paul@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > On Tue, 7 Dec 2010, Cousson, Benoit wrote: > >> On 12/7/2010 2:25 AM, Paul Walmsley wrote: >> >> [...] >> >> > + * >> > + * XXX This file needs to be updated to align on one of "OMAP4", >> > "OMAP44XX", >> > + * or "OMAP4430". >> >> Yep, I was thinking to change that as well. My first thought was OMAP4 to get >> a shorter name, but when we will introduce OMAP4440, we might have some new >> entries, that will looks ugly close to OMAP4. >> So at the end I will prefer OMAP44XX for the moment and we might renamed to >> OMAP4430 or OMAP4440 for the entries that will diverge. >> >> Do you want to change that for 2.6.38? >> It will require some sync with the various users of these defines, but that >> should be doable. > > I don't mind waiting until after 2.6.38, I think we'll have a pretty huge > pile of patches on our hands to merge already for .38... maybe Tony or > Kevin have some opinions though. I think this should wait 'til after 2.6.38, but be early in the next cycle so all dependencies can be handled early. Kevin -- 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
