On Wed, Jan 09, 2019 at 06:57:53PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> Replace custom grown macro with generic INTEL_CPU_FAM6_NODATA() one.
>
> No functional change intended.
>
> Signed-off-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevche...@linux.intel.com>
> Acked-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wyso...@intel.com>
> ---
> drivers/acpi/acpi_lpss.c | 6 ++----
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/acpi_lpss.c b/drivers/acpi/acpi_lpss.c
> index 5f94c35d165f..633a528bb6ea 100644
> --- a/drivers/acpi/acpi_lpss.c
> +++ b/drivers/acpi/acpi_lpss.c
> @@ -311,11 +311,9 @@ static const struct lpss_device_desc bsw_spi_dev_desc = {
> .setup = lpss_deassert_reset,
> };
>
> -#define ICPU(model) { X86_VENDOR_INTEL, 6, model, X86_FEATURE_ANY, }
> -
> static const struct x86_cpu_id lpss_cpu_ids[] = {
> - ICPU(INTEL_FAM6_ATOM_SILVERMONT), /* Valleyview, Bay Trail */
Sorry but the previous one was better: INTEL_FAM6_ATOM_SILVERMONT I can
find in the tree...
> - ICPU(INTEL_FAM6_ATOM_AIRMONT), /* Braswell, Cherry Trail */
> + INTEL_CPU_FAM6_NODATA(ATOM_SILVERMONT), /* Valleyview, Bay Trail */
For ATOM_SILVERMONT I find different things:
INTEL_CPU_FAM6(ATOM_SILVERMONT
X86_CSTATES_MODEL(INTEL_FAM6_ATOM_SILVERMONT
ICPU(INTEL_FAM6_ATOM_SILVERMONT
...
so you guys need to sit down and agree on a single form of usage and
stick with it.
And I'd advise against the first one which cuts off the
INTEL_FAM6_ATOM_SILVERMONT and other defines.
Thx.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
Good mailing practices for 400: avoid top-posting and trim the reply.
