Hi Benoît,
On Fri, 4 Mar 2011, Cousson, Benoit wrote:
> On 3/4/2011 12:53 AM, Paul Walmsley wrote:
> > On Thu, 3 Mar 2011, Paul Walmsley wrote:
> >
> > > On Fri, 25 Feb 2011, Cousson, Benoit wrote:
> > >
> > > > static struct omap_hwmod_ocp_if *omap3xxx_l4_core_slaves[] = {
> > > > &omap3xxx_l3_main__l4_core,
> > > > - &omap3_l4_core__sr1,
> > > > - &omap3_l4_core__sr2,
> >
> > Never mind, I see the issue now...
>
> It was simply wrong as explained in the answer to Sanjeev.
> I do agree that the changelog does not say anything about it, sorry about
> that.
>
> BTW, do you want me to re-send that patch properly and not hidden in previous
> email thread with Sanjeev?
I guess the best thing to do would be to split that patch into two
patches: one which drops the bogus omap3xxx_l4_core_slaves entries, and
the other that removes the interconnect masters. If you have the
opportunity, it might be good to extend the latter to 2420/2430 also.
Am not sure that getting rid of these is a good idea in the long run, but
am fine with doing it for now.
- Paul
