From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755997Ab1KHPXx (ORCPT ); Tue, 8 Nov 2011 10:23:53 -0500 Received: from na3sys009aog116.obsmtp.com ([74.125.149.240]:53613 "EHLO na3sys009aog116.obsmtp.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755159Ab1KHPXv (ORCPT ); Tue, 8 Nov 2011 10:23:51 -0500 Date: Tue, 8 Nov 2011 17:23:46 +0200 From: Felipe Balbi To: Nicolas Ferre Cc: balbi@ti.com, Nikolaus Voss , linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, ben-linux@fluff.org, khali@linux-fr.org, rmallon@gmail.com Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 2/4] drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-at91.c: add new driver Message-ID: <20111108152343.GJ20728@legolas.emea.dhcp.ti.com> Reply-To: balbi@ti.com References: <7bdd6b456b0e055441cb25634c8cb6d483718f6c.1320753142.git.n.voss@weinmann.de> <20111108144115.GH20728@legolas.emea.dhcp.ti.com> <4EB9477E.8070002@atmel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="sT9gWZPUZYhvPS56" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4EB9477E.8070002@atmel.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org --sT9gWZPUZYhvPS56 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, Nov 08, 2011 at 04:15:10PM +0100, Nicolas Ferre wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 >=20 > On 11/08/2011 03:41 PM, Felipe Balbi : >=20 > >> + if (cpu_is_at91rm9200()) { /* AT91RM9200 Errata #22 */ > >=20 > > I don't think you should be using cpu_is_* on drivers. >=20 > It is a common pattern in at91 drivers and has worked for ages. > Do you think it is related to the need to be able to compile the > driver for any SoC in the case of multi-SoC zImage support? we have drivers compiling on multiple OMAP versions without those hacks. Generally, we check the IP revision for that. Don't you have a Revision register of some sort ? --=20 balbi --sT9gWZPUZYhvPS56 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJOuUl/AAoJEIaOsuA1yqREQ/8QAIyXNqyfnLJQ1863qTOyPjCn agTrRMHoYqPCN+4ez3XHuFixFj3wbpF5ohIsLaHIy79QN98vgN3H94a+z4K19KN9 OWYQ0EfxNUiMHarYP1uEHvuWJIYvULJE2v0DcqWsPROQKqBPP3PbppeLblnsIuwT XNhWLo6XmMKHYdbI2O1LxvOKJB9uBT8G9iYWIkEieR/4RcxTfLMr+mfy9+950F35 xeXHRn74t4u21kIMJdIavky149zNwrdzzdHkCNJn2VfiDILrQMBcsUTTU3+rePOC pZSYWZ37aS9EM2kvwFFETj1Hxpbm2ybk/AaxY+BEvkxXj2dP5oXlGy6dCgMnVivT Dw0zy66u4vMH1eppl+vaSbo+hU7QwgRtL0InSPpxdH9/eNa+t71Le+/MYcXBeyX3 BAQ5UY9IradHsGlfEmJInZGiTjGzwl43tQBpIYDq5+ZVB9Q9GSs1nOGHcsiw7BGp aDgPea0LCRjR425cODfBvOj0FiDWMvUqpyfpSRfKdmrwJLmRuqdCVfts+jfVhRn6 zSFMfl/3IU1oIXFcWDSTkeQTbXGyjDeXSkBQXlMh4Uzi3oIka77NBqduLn4a6a4o y5/GFLe1HU6Ez8taYDqQyNSZc3LqNZhCQpd5fbnVvk8kh7HYKqxVJBUaqMWM6GBL IG9FHtibdS1aJ9b7vKE2 =PHMG -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --sT9gWZPUZYhvPS56--