[RFC PATCH v3 1/2] ARM: kernel: update cpuinfo to print SoC model name

[Nicolas Pitre]

On Wed, 30 Jan 2013, Matt Sealey wrote:

> On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 1:07 PM, Nicolas Pitre <nico at fluxnic.net> wrote:
> > On Wed, 30 Jan 2013, Ruslan Bilovol wrote:
> >
> >> Currently, reading /proc/cpuinfo provides userspace with CPU ID of
> >> the CPU carrying out the read from the file.
> >> Userspace using this information may decide what module
> >> to load or how to configure some specific (and processor-depended)
> >> settings or so.
> >> However, since really different SoCs can share same ARM core,
> >> this information currently is not so useful.
> >> For example, TI OMAP4460 and OMAP4470 SoCs show the same
> >> information in the /proc/cpuinfo whereas they are different.
> >> Since in most cases ARM CPU is a part of some system on a chip (SoC),
> >> the "cpuinfo" file looks like exactly that place, where this
> >> information have to be displayed.
> >>
> >> So added new line "SoC name" in the "cpuinfo" output for system
> >> on a chip name. It is placed between CPU information and machine
> >> information, so the file structure looks gracefully (CPU-SoC-Hardware)
> >>
> >> Example:
> >>
> >> / # cat proc/cpuinfo
> >> [...]
> >> CPU variant     : 0x2
> >> CPU part        : 0xc09
> >> CPU revision    : 10
> >>
> >> SoC name        : OMAP4470
> >>
> >> Hardware        : OMAP4 Blaze Tablet
> >
> > Please remove that extra blank line between "SoC name" and "Hardware".
> > The blank line after "CPU revision" is fine.
> >
> > Also, please rename this to "System name".  Not all systems are "on
> > chip".  By using "System name" this is more universally useful.
> 
> I can't agree with "System name", it is confusing in common
> terminology since it's about the same definition as the current
> "Hardware" line.
> 
> If we're just printing out the name of the device surrounding the CPU
> - be it a Northbridge/Southbridge combination or SoC packaging -
> "Chipset" might be a better name for it.

That suits me as well.


Nicolas