On 09:26-20130315, Jon Hunter wrote: > > On 03/15/2013 08:56 AM, Nishanth Menon wrote: > > On 16:44-20130314, Jon Hunter wrote: > >> > >> On 03/14/2013 03:58 PM, Nishanth Menon wrote: > >>> Add DT OPP table for OMAP36xx family of devices. This data is > >>> decoded by OF with of_init_opp_table() helper function. This > >>> overrides the default OMAP34xx CPU OPP table definition. > >> > >> Not sure I following the last sentence. The tables are in a different > >> dtsi file and only the relevant file should be included, right? > > omap3630.dsi includes omap3.dtsi (which is meant for OMAP34xx). > > The opp tables introduced by this patch in omap36xx.dtsi will override > > the ones defined on omap3.dtsi. Will the following rephrase help clarify > > this? > > > > Original: > > This overrides the default OMAP34xx CPU OPP table definition. > > Suggested; > > This overrides the default OMAP34xx CPU OPP table definition in > > omap3.dtsi. > > Sorry, I just missed that the omap3430 opps were in omap3.dtsi and not > omap34xx.dtsi. I guess I am not familiar with how the DTC overrides > nodes, however, at least from a readability standpoint it would seem > nice to have the omap3430 opps in a omap3430 specific dtsi and not > omap3.dtsi. However, thats just my opinion. most of omap3630 is based off omap3430. I know from an readability point of view, it might have been good to split that to omap3-common.dtsi, omap34xx.dtsi, omap36xx.dtsi etc.. But there is no real need at this point in time to do that. Unless, ofcourse, we'd like to set that up as an standard for all OMAP SoCs... -- Regards, Nishanth Menon -- 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
