[PATCH v2 6/7] omap: mailbox: fix detection for previously supported chips

Cousson, Benoit b-cousson at ti.com
Mon Nov 8 16:43:39 EST 2010

On 11/7/2010 10:15 AM, Ramirez Luna, Omar wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 6, 2010 at 1:11 PM, Cousson, Benoit<b-cousson at ti.com>  wrote:
>>> -#if defined(CONFIG_ARCH_OMAP3430)
>>> +#if defined(CONFIG_ARCH_OMAP3)
>> Ideally you should get rid of all the CONFIG_ARCH_OMAPXXX or cpu_is_omap in
>> that code. This is a driver, it should be generic.
>> If you have to handle differences between OMAP version, please do that in
>> the devices, not in the driver.
>> This patch just contains a few of them, but the original mailbox.c file is
>> full of that kind of test.
>> I know that you are not the original writer of this code, but since the
>> clean it, it will be good to remove all the legacy code.
> I mentioned it in the cover-letter, I should have put it here too, my bad.
> <quote>
> This is meant as a short term solution until proper cleanup is done,
> as suggested in:
> http://marc.info/?l=linux-arm-kernel&m=128534253231481&w=2
> </quote>

OK, sorry I didn't realized that this email thread was about the 
mailbox. I'm glad to see that both Paul and Nishant are aligned with me.

> Does nobody care that the driver is not working right now for some
> chips (since it was working before!!) and are willing to wait for more
> time until the proper cleanup is done?

Sorry again, but removing these tests didn't not seems to be a huge task 
for my point of view.
Anyway, if you want to do another phase and if everybody agree on that, 
that's OK for me as well.

> For me it is a hassle, because if I need to do something on 3630 I
> have to merge this patch, then apply what I'm working into, then
> remove the patch, apply everything again to see no dependencies are
> there, then send.

Yeah, sometime life really sucks :-)


More information about the linux-arm-kernel mailing list