[PATCH] ARM: OMAP2+: cpu: Make cpu_class_is_omap2 true for all non-omap1 platforms

[Hiremath, Vaibhav]

On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 14:48:21, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> * Hiremath, Vaibhav <hvaibhav at ti.com> [120710 02:15]:
> > On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 14:11:08, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> > > * Hiremath, Vaibhav <hvaibhav at ti.com> [120627 13:37]:
> > > > --- a/arch/arm/plat-omap/include/plat/cpu.h
> > > > +++ b/arch/arm/plat-omap/include/plat/cpu.h
> > > > @@ -42,7 +42,14 @@
> > > >  #define OMAP2_DEVICE_TYPE_GP           3
> > > >  #define OMAP2_DEVICE_TYPE_BAD          4
> > > > 
> > > > +#ifdef CONFIG_ARCH_OMAP2PLUS
> > > >  int omap_type(void);
> > > > +#else
> > > > +inline static int omap_type(void)
> > > > +{
> > > > +	/* Always return GP, since it is not being used anyway for omap1 */
> > > > +	return OMAP2_DEVICE_TYPE_GP;
> > > > +}
> > > > +#endif
> > > > 
> > > >  /*
> > > >   * omap_rev bits:
> > > 
> > > Just to follow-up on this, looks like we need to postpone this
> > > for v3.7. While at it, we need to make sure all soc_is_omapxxxx()
> > > are false by default.
> > > 
> > 
> > Just FYI, I had submitted V2 of this patch.
> > 
> > > What you're suggesting above would also depend on some MULTI_ARCH
> > > option set if multiple ARM architectures are selected. Above patch
> > > would only optimize things when ARCH_OMAP2PLUS alone is selected.
> > > 
> > 
> > Isn't this only applicable for ARCH_OMAP2PLUS and OMAP1?? And above patch 
> > take cares of both, as OMAP1 and 2 will not be build together, since 
> > compiler flags itself will be different.
> 
> Right, but we also need to deal with
>  
> > Can you elaborate on how things will break if multiple ARM architectures are 
> > selected?
> >
> > I am not sure whether I am following you completely.
> 
> We have quite a few initcalls that exit early with various soc_is, cpu_is,
> cpu_class_is tests that would fail for multi zImage kernels. Some of these
> have been patched away with additional calls in MACHINE_START, but some
> still remain.
> 

Let me check on this inside code but if you have any quick reference, please 
let me know, I can fix it and submit the patch.

> We probably always need to return false for all soc_is_omapxxxx() unless
> the SoC detection is initialized in id.c.
> 

Ditto...

Thanks,
Vaibhav