On Tue, May 8, 2012 at 5:25 AM, Kevin Hilman <khilman@xxxxxx> wrote:
> Kevin Hilman <khilman@xxxxxx> writes:
>
>> "J, KEERTHY" <j-keerthy@xxxxxx> writes:
>
> [...]
>
>>>>> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/smartreflex.c b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/smartreflex.c
>>>>> index 2edd1e2..d859277 100644
>>>>> --- a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/smartreflex.c
>>>>> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/smartreflex.c
>>>>> @@ -183,7 +183,7 @@ static void sr_set_regfields(struct omap_sr *sr)
>>>>> sr->err_weight = OMAP3430_SR_ERRWEIGHT;
>>>>> sr->err_maxlimit = OMAP3430_SR_ERRMAXLIMIT;
>>>>> sr->accum_data = OMAP3430_SR_ACCUMDATA;
>>>>> - if (!(strcmp(sr->name, "sr1"))) {
>>>>> + if (!(strcmp(sr->name, "smartreflex_mpu_iva"))) {
>>>>
>>>> What if voltage rail is different for mpu and iva? I have seen some devices
>>>> supports SmartReflex have different voltage rails for mpu and iva.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I get the point. OMAP3 iva and mpu have a common rail. OMAP4 onwards
>>> even we have different rails for mpu and iva. I will enhance the checks here.
>>
>> Rather than enhancing the checks, this SoC specific data should probably
>> just be made part of the SoC specific hwmod dev_attr.
>
> That being said, this is an additional feature we can add after this
> driver is moved.
>
> I would like this series to concentrate on the cleanups necessary to
> move to drivers/*, then additional features to support other SoCs can be
> added on top.
>
> Keerthy, please prepare a patch to generalize this to other SoCs by
> using dev_attr for this SoC specific data. We can add it after this
> series is merged upstream.
Kevin,
Ok. I will do that.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Kevin
--
Regards and Thanks,
Keerthy
--
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
