On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 03:09:39, Hilman, Kevin wrote: > "Hiremath, Vaibhav" <hvaibhav@xxxxxx> writes: > > > On Wed, May 09, 2012 at 04:08:09, Hilman, Kevin wrote: > >> Vaibhav Hiremath <hvaibhav@xxxxxx> writes: > >> > >> > The function __omap2_set_globals() can be common across all > >> > platforms/architectures, even in case of omap4, internally it > >> > calls same set of functions as in __omap2_set_globals() function > >> > (except for sdrc). > >> > >> OK so far. > >> > >> > This patch adds new config flag SOC_HAS_OMAP2_SDRC to handle sdrc, > >> > so that we can reuse same function across omap2/3/4... > >> > >> But what happens when a single kernel is built that has support for an > >> SoC with an SDRC (OMAP4) and one that doesn't (AM33xx)? > >> > > > > As such Nothing...I looking into this direction while implementing. > > > > In that case, sdrc.c file will be compiled in and execution will jump to > > omap2_set_globals_sdrc(). But inside this function, we are already checking > > whether the omap2_globals->sdrc and omap2_globals->sms for NULL and then use > > it. > > > > And function omap2_sdrc_init() is also depends on machine, so in case of > > Am33xx, it won't get into sdrc execution at all. And in case of omap4, it > > will. > > Then why bother with the #ifdef at all? > > If it already safe to call on all SoCs, just get rid of the #ifdef all > together. > Kevin, sdrc.o target gets built only as "omap-2-3-common", this will not get built for omap4, am33xx, ti81xx, etc... So in order to avoid build break, you have to have some mechanism, and that's where we need to create config option dependent on platform. Another better way of handling this is adding __weak function. What's your opinion on this? Thanks, Vaibhav -- 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
