"Menon, Nishanth" <n...@ti.com> writes: > On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 16:15, Kevin Hilman <khil...@ti.com> wrote: >> Maximilian Schwerin <m...@tigris.de> writes: >> >>> From: Steve Sakoman <st...@sakoman.com> >>> >>> Don't try to add IVA OPPs for OMAP3 versions not containing an IVA >>> subsystem, as this would make omap_init_opp_table fail. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Steve Sakoman <st...@sakoman.com> >>> Signed-off-by: Maximilian Schwerin <m...@tigris.de> >> >> Minor: patch subjects for arch/arm/* core code need to have the ARM: >> prefix also. >> >> Also, please run scripts/checkpatch.pl on your patch and fix the >> warnings. >> >>> --- >>> arch/arm/mach-omap2/opp.c | 4 ++++ >>> 1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/opp.c b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/opp.c >>> index 9262a6b..414f2ec 100644 >>> --- a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/opp.c >>> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/opp.c >>> @@ -62,6 +62,10 @@ int __init omap_init_opp_table(struct omap_opp_def >>> *opp_def, >>> __func__, i); >>> return -EINVAL; >>> } >>> + >>> + if ((strcmp(opp_def->hwmod_name,"iva") == 0) && >>> !omap3_has_iva()) >>> + continue; >>> + >>> oh = omap_hwmod_lookup(opp_def->hwmod_name); >>> if (!oh || !oh->od) { >>> pr_warn("%s: no hwmod or odev for %s, [%d] " >> >> Wouldn't the one-liner below do the same thing? >> >> Actually, your patch makes it less noisy at boot time, avoiding the >> pr_warn(), so is probably better. > > The only issue i have with current patch is that it focusses to solve > a specific device IVA. > we could have similar variances if we had SGX/AESS device etc > registered in the common > table. a generic solution might be preferable - could we reduce the > severity of pr_warn to pr_debug and do a continue instead?
I agree, that would be a better generic solution. Kevin -- 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