[PATCH-V2 3/4] ARM: OMAP2+: CLEANUP: Remove unnecessary ifdef around __omap2_set_globals

[Hiremath, Vaibhav]

On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 12:07:59, R, Sricharan wrote:
> Vaibhav,
> 
> > > >> > This patch adds new config flag SOC_HAS_OMAP2_SDRC to handle
> > sdrc,
> > > >> > so that we can reuse same function across omap2/3/4...
> > > >>
> > > >> But what happens when a single kernel is built that has support
> > for an
> > > >> SoC with an SDRC (OMAP4) and one that doesn't (AM33xx)?
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > > As such Nothing...I looking into this direction while implementing.
> > > >
> > > > In that case, sdrc.c file will be compiled in and execution will
> > jump to
> > > > omap2_set_globals_sdrc(). But inside this function, we are already
> > checking
> > > > whether the omap2_globals->sdrc and omap2_globals->sms for NULL and
> > then use
> > > > it.
> > > >
> > > > And function omap2_sdrc_init() is also depends on machine, so in
> > case of
> > > > Am33xx, it won't get into sdrc execution at all. And in case of
> > omap4, it
> > > > will.
> > >
> > > Then why bother with the #ifdef at all?
> > >
> > > If it already safe to call on all SoCs, just get rid of the #ifdef
> > all
> > > together.
> > >
> >
> > Kevin,
> >
> > sdrc.o target gets built only as "omap-2-3-common", this will not get
> > built
> > for omap4, am33xx, ti81xx, etc...
> > So in order to avoid build break, you have to have some mechanism, and
> > that's where we need to create config option dependent on platform.
> >
> > Another better way of handling this is adding __weak function.
> >
> > What's your opinion on this?
> >
>   Then how about just allowing to compile for all omap2/3/4 ?
> 

I wouldn't recommend that. 
Also, now we have almost all the devices coming in with EMIF (no sdrc).

Thanks,
Vaibhav