Please don't edit the subject. Use S5PC110 & S5PC210 as is

Kyungmin Park kmpark at
Fri Oct 1 09:19:36 EDT 2010

On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 12:47 PM, Jassi Brar <jassisinghbrar at> wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 11:53 AM, Kyungmin Park <kmpark at> wrote:
>> On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 11:38 AM, Kukjin Kim < at> wrote:
>>> Kyungmin Park wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>> Please don't edit the subject.
>>>> samsung.git;a=commitdiff;h=d8c3d96f5df54251c06686bb00811e4b7e0f6547
>>>> samsung.git;a=commitdiff;h=7dcde8f18b0df4d332d6b359fd6270772a42f71f
>>>> Patches from DMC we decide to use the S5PC110 & S5PC210 as we're only
>>>> received the Spec C110 & C210.
>>>> Most of people including mobile division don't know the V210 & V310
>>>> SOC receptively.
>>>> We're already confusing with names, we always talk with C110 & C210
>>>> but works on V210 & V310 directory.
>>>> well question. What's the SOC is used at Galaxy S & wave phone?
>>>> I think S5PC110 is more well known than S5PV210.
>>>> The conclusion of the 2.6.36 merge window
>>>> Systems and processors: Income s.r.o. PXA270 single-board computers,
>>>> Wiliboard WBD-111 boards, and Samsung S5PC210-based systems.
>>>> Thank you,
>>>> Kyungmin Park
>>> As I'm a maintainer of Samsung S5P SoCs, I would like to use second column
>>> in the subject line to indicate the ARCH_XXX name like following.
>>> 'ARM: S5PV210: <patch subject>'
>>> As you know, it means the patch is mainly regarding ARCH_S5PV210
>>> (arch/arm/mach-s5pv210/).
>>> It can be help to many people, including me that the title speak where it
>>> belong to.
>>> And I believe someone who can use git log to see the log and source, S5PC110
>>> is in the 'arch/arm/mach-s5pv210/'.
>> Right, many people are confused where's the s5pc110 codes? and know
>> it's under mach-s5pv210.
>> And finally know it's almost same S5PC110 = S5PV210 so if it use the
>> S5PC110 at subject. not issue.
> People will be confused to see S5PC110/C210 in subject line, when
> apparently there is no such machine in the kernel.
> The decision time was when we moved C110 -> V210 and C210 -> V310
> No point invoking the dead, let us move one.
Who's "we"? I think it's just decision from LSI side.
Do you heard or talked with mobile division person with V210 & V310?
At least DMC & Mobile I don't see the V210 & V310 at any documents and heard.
All documents and reports are written with C110 & C210.
It's best that send the V210 & V310 User Manual to mobile division and
ask for that use the V210 & V310 officially.

Than this problem will be solved.

Thank you,
Kyungmin Park

More information about the linux-arm-kernel mailing list