> -----Original Message----- > From: Cousson, Benoit [mailto:b-cousson@xxxxxx] > Sent: Monday, February 21, 2011 11:41 PM > To: Shilimkar, Santosh > Cc: linux-omap@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Balbi, Felipe; R, Sricharan > Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/6] omap4: Initialise the l3 device with the > hwmod data. > > On 2/21/2011 2:46 PM, Shilimkar, Santosh wrote: > > From: sricharan<r.sricharan@xxxxxx> > > > > The l3 interconnect device is build with all the data required > > to handle the error logging. The data is extracted from the > > hwmod data base. > > > > Signed-off-by: sricharan<r.sricharan@xxxxxx> > > Signed-off-by: sricharan<r.sricharan@xxxxxx> > > Tested-by: sricharan<r.sricharan@xxxxxx> > > Mmm, I'm not sure the tested-by is meaningfull in your case, since > you wrote the code and so everybody will assume you tested it. > One s-o-b should be probably enough. > Well he tested whole series including the patch from Felipe. So a tested-by on whole series doesn't hurt, right ? Just for record, I have seen tested by applied on whole series Where as some of the patches in this series are just comment updates. > > Cc: Benoit Cousson<b-cousson@xxxxxx> > > --- > > arch/arm/mach-omap2/devices.c | 23 +++++++++++++++++++++++ > > 1 files changed, 23 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/devices.c b/arch/arm/mach- > omap2/devices.c > > index 2d46f55..25fa2ad 100644 > > --- a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/devices.c > > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/devices.c > > @@ -57,6 +57,29 @@ static int __init omap3_l3_init(void) > > } > > postcore_initcall(omap3_l3_init); > > > > +static int __init omap4_l3_init(void) > > +{ > > + int l; > > + struct omap_hwmod *oh; > > + struct omap_device *od; > > + char oh_name[12]; > > + > > + l = snprintf(oh_name, 12, "l3_main_1"); > > + > > + oh = omap_hwmod_lookup(oh_name); > > + > > + if (!oh) > > + pr_err("could not look up %s\n", oh_name); > > + > > + od = omap_device_build("omap4-l3-interconnect", 0, oh, NULL, > > In order to stick to the OMAP device naming convention and to have > something not dependent of the chip version, I think we'd better > name > the device like that: "omap_l3_noc". Since it is a Arteris "Network > On > Chip" on OMAP4. We will not have to change it for OMAP5 then. > On OMAP3 the name can then be "omap_l3_smx" for the Sonics MX > interconnect. > Device name changes are fine but file name changes as per this. dosn't look right if they are like omap_l3_noc.c omap_l3_smx.c May be we can rename them like below omap_l3_3xxx.c omap_l3_4xxx.c > Please note that the L4 is in both case a Sonics 3220. But I don't > think > the L4 is managed by this series. > Maybe the driver file name should be renamed accordingly. > L4 is not included. -- 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
