On Wednesday 18 September 2013 09:44 AM, Nishanth Menon wrote: > On 09/18/2013 08:31 AM, Santosh Shilimkar wrote: >> On Wednesday 18 September 2013 07:23 AM, Sricharan R wrote: > [...] > 4, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0); >>> >>> /* >>> + * Configure the CNTFRQ register for the secondary cpu's which >>> + * indicates the frequency of the cpu local timers. >>> + */ >>> + if (soc_is_omap54xx() || soc_is_dra7xx()) >> CNTFREQ programming was not supported on OMAP5 ES1.0 and that was one >> of the reason this parameter came into picture. So you need to skip >> the ES1.0 here. >> > Even though ES1.0 is present in id.c, we have 0 support for ES1.0. > > ES1.0 was more or less a test chip, no production devices were > manufactured with it, no public boards (including uevms) are available > to purchase with ES1.0. Further, inside TI, all ES1.0 samples and > boards have been scrapped and replaced with ES2.0 platforms. > > In short, no users and dead code in kernel tree. I dont see why we > cant just cleanup OMAP5 ES1.0 entirely from kernel tree? > Yes...There is no reason to keep broken ES1.0 support. Patch please ;-) Regards, Santosh -- 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
