From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754425AbdLGOxX (ORCPT ); Thu, 7 Dec 2017 09:53:23 -0500 Received: from lelnx194.ext.ti.com ([198.47.27.80]:19711 "EHLO lelnx194.ext.ti.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754062AbdLGOxW (ORCPT ); Thu, 7 Dec 2017 09:53:22 -0500 Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/6] ARM: davinci: clean up map_io functions To: David Lechner , CC: Kevin Hilman , References: <1512182054-17410-1-git-send-email-david@lechnology.com> <1512182054-17410-2-git-send-email-david@lechnology.com> From: Sekhar Nori Message-ID: <2e0a60bb-08be-5d0c-3c4c-c9e075c9170a@ti.com> Date: Thu, 7 Dec 2017 20:22:07 +0530 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1512182054-17410-2-git-send-email-david@lechnology.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-EXCLAIMER-MD-CONFIG: e1e8a2fd-e40a-4ac6-ac9b-f7e9cc9ee180 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Saturday 02 December 2017 08:04 AM, David Lechner wrote: > This cleans up the map_io functions in the board init files for > mach-davinci. > > Most of the boards had a wrapper function around _init(). This > wrapper is removed and the function is used directly. Additionally, the > _init() functions are renamed to _map_io() to match the > field name. > > Signed-off-by: David Lechner > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-davinci/board-dm646x-evm.c b/arch/arm/mach-davinci/board-dm646x-evm.c > index cb0a41e..f0e2762 100644 > --- a/arch/arm/mach-davinci/board-dm646x-evm.c > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-davinci/board-dm646x-evm.c > @@ -716,16 +716,6 @@ static void __init evm_init_i2c(void) > } > #endif > > -#define DM6467T_EVM_REF_FREQ 33000000 > - > -static void __init davinci_map_io(void) > -{ > - dm646x_init(); The call to dm646x_init() is dropped here, but I don't see it added back, at least in this patch. > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-davinci/dm646x.c b/arch/arm/mach-davinci/dm646x.c > index da21353..b3be5c8 100644 > --- a/arch/arm/mach-davinci/dm646x.c > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-davinci/dm646x.c > @@ -17,6 +17,7 @@ > #include > #include > > +#include > #include > > #include > @@ -952,11 +953,16 @@ int __init dm646x_init_edma(struct edma_rsv_info *rsv) > return IS_ERR(edma_pdev) ? PTR_ERR(edma_pdev) : 0; > } > > -void __init dm646x_init(void) > +#define DM6467T_EVM_REF_FREQ 33000000 > + > +void __init dm646x_map_io(void) > { > davinci_common_init(&davinci_soc_info_dm646x); > davinci_map_sysmod(); > davinci_clk_init(davinci_soc_info_dm646x.cpu_clks); > + > + if (machine_is_davinci_dm6467tevm()) > + davinci_set_refclk_rate(DM6467T_EVM_REF_FREQ); > } I think we should leave the DM646x case out of this since there are additional issues like introducing these EVM specific defines in a file meant for SoC. Is this clean-up a must for you to implement rest of the series (haven't looked at other patches yet). Thanks, Sekhar