On 06/07/2013 05:44 PM, gg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
On 2013-06-07 15:36, Mark Brown wrote:
On Fri, Jun 07, 2013 at 01:53:10PM +0300, Oleksandr Kozaruk wrote:
From: Graeme Gregory <gg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
The TWL6025 was never released beyond sample form and was replaced by
the PhoenixLite range of chips - TWL6032. Change the references to
reference the TWL6032 class and name the registers to twl6032 in
line with
an actual released chip name to avoid confusion.
Currently there is no users of TWL6025 in the code.
Given that the chip exists even if not widely distributed it seems as
well to keep the twl6025 references in there at least in the device ID
table - it won't do any harm to people using the twl6032 name and might
help someone who happens to pick up an old board for whatever reason.
I do not think any "old boards" exist, it really was a limited run!
Graeme
Hello Mark, Graeme
So, what is your opinion? Could we move forward with this?
In addition, If twl6032 will be added on top of twl6025 there will be no
guarantee
that twl6025 will work because:
- there is no HW to verify
- there is no documentation on twl6025 available, so, in case if current
implementation is
different from what is needed for twl6032 - it can't be handled properly
--
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
