> -----Original Message-----
> From: Pandita, Vikram
> Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 7:01 PM
> To: Shilimkar, Santosh; Menon, Nishanth; linux-omap
> Cc: Chikkature Rajashekar, Madhusudhan; Pais, Allen; Gadiyar,
> Anand; Cousson, Benoit; Kevin Hilman; Premi, Sanjeev; Aguirre
> Rodriguez, Sergio Alberto; Tony Lindgren
> Subject: RE: [RFC][PATCH] OMAP3: introduce OMAP3630
>
>
>
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: Shilimkar, Santosh
> >>
> >> diff --git a/arch/arm/plat-omap/include/mach/cpu.h b/arch/arm/plat-
> >> omap/include/mach/cpu.h
> >> index 431fec4..af1080f 100644
> >> --- a/arch/arm/plat-omap/include/mach/cpu.h
> >> +++ b/arch/arm/plat-omap/include/mach/cpu.h
> >> @@ -383,6 +383,12 @@ IS_OMAP_TYPE(3430, 0x3430)
> >> #define OMAP3430_REV_ES2_1 0x34302034
> >> #define OMAP3430_REV_ES3_0 0x34303034
> >> #define OMAP3430_REV_ES3_1 0x34304034
> >> +/* NOTE: Add 36xx series below
> >> + * If additional 34xx series are added, OMAP3430_REV_ESXXXX can be
> >> + * added above the 3630 defines and series renumbered to ensure
> >> + * rev() > checks to work
> >> + */
> >> +#define OMAP3630_REV_ES1_0 0x34305034
> >>
> >> #define OMAP443X_CLASS 0x44300034
> >Was expecting that this patch will add "cpu_is_omap36xx()" in cpu.h
> >apart from above. Is this handled in another patch ?
>
> Idea is to re-use all 34xx code for 36xx, as per the mail
> thread on list, and given in reference.
> Hence at run time, the check could be:
>
> if (omap_rev() == OMAP3630_REV_ES1_0)
> xxxxx
>
> cpu_is_omap34xx() will be true for 36xx as well.
[sp] This case seems quite similar to the OMAP35x.
Can you look at this thread:
http://marc.info/?l=linux-omap&m=125372581804902&w=2
It applies equally well here as well...
I will be submitting updated patch tomorrow.
Best regards,
Sanjeev
>
> >
> >
> >Regards,
> >Santosh
> --
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
