On 10/11/2013 01:38 AM, Joseph Lo wrote: > On Thu, 2013-10-10 at 07:20 +0800, Stephen Warren wrote: >> On 10/09/2013 03:20 AM, Joseph Lo wrote: >>> The LP1 suspend procedure is the same with Tegra30 and Tegra114. Just >>> need to update the difference of the register address, then we can >>> continue to share the code. >>> - .rept (tegra30_sdram_pad_size - tegra114_sdram_pad_address) / 4 >>> + .rept (tegra124_sdram_pad_address - tegra114_sdram_pad_address) / 4 >> >> I assume this is intended to reserve enough space to store all the saved >> registers for the largest table of tegra30_sdram_pad_address, >> tegra114_sdram_pad_address, tegra124_sdram_pad_address. I count more >> entries in the existing Tegra114 table than the new Tegra124 table, so >> I'm not sure this part of the change is correct. >> >> Is there no way to do a max(tegra30 size, tegra114 size, tegra124 size) >> so you don't have to pick manually which size to reserve here? > > I don't have a good way to achieve this, because we may have another new > SoC that may continue re-use these codes. Hence I need to keep > maintaining the max() function. Sure, but adding one entry to the max function is better than manually calculating the size of each array and performing the max yourself. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-tegra" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
