On Friday 12 December 2014 13:15:43 Pankaj Dubey wrote: > >> + > >> +static void __iomem *exynos_chipid_base; > >> + > >> +struct exynos_chipid_info exynos_soc_info; > >> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(exynos_soc_info); > > > > The soc_device already has similar data.Why is this needed? Is it > > temporary for compatibility? > > struct soc_device_attribute can hold these two (product_id, and > revision) but they are defined as char * in soc_device_atttribute, and I > feel it's more specific for exposing via sysfs. > Also existing code in mach-exynos compares them via product_id/revision > macros, so I can say to keep compatibility. We had a similar discussion about the Marvell SoCs a while ago, and at the time we concluded that it would be best to create a platform- independent API to match the strings in soc_device_attribute against a list of strings in the driver, either by matching the start of the string, or using the glob_match() function. Would that work for you? Arnd -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
 |