On 29/01/14 18:01, Rajeshwari Birje wrote: > Hi Minkyu Knag, > > On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 1:34 PM, Minkyu Kang <mk7.k...@samsung.com> wrote: >> Because of the list of peripherals is not sequential, >> such a routine does not check for valid correctly. >> Error check will be done when call the exynos_pinmux_config function. >> >> Signed-off-by: Minkyu Kang <mk7.k...@samsung.com> >> --- >> arch/arm/cpu/armv7/exynos/pinmux.c | 7 +------ >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 6 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/exynos/pinmux.c >> b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/exynos/pinmux.c >> index 904177a..645c497 100644 >> --- a/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/exynos/pinmux.c >> +++ b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/exynos/pinmux.c >> @@ -751,12 +751,7 @@ static int exynos5_pinmux_decode_periph_id(const void >> *blob, int node) >> if (err) >> return PERIPH_ID_NONE; >> >> - /* check for invalid peripheral id */ >> - if ((PERIPH_ID_SDMMC4 > cell[1]) || (cell[1] < PERIPH_ID_UART0)) >> - return cell[1]; > > Cant we check if less than PERIPH_ID_COUNT, this way we can atleast > cut down some wrong values. > Or value has to range between PERIPH_ID_UART0 and PERIPH_ID_COUNT >
possible. but I think it's unnecessary. It can not check error correctly. for example, if cell[1] is 55 then it's valid but does not supported. Thanks, Minkyu Kang. _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot