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

[Nicolas Pitre]

On Wed, 30 Jan 2013, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:

> On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 02:07:53PM -0500, Nicolas Pitre 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.
> 
> You may notice I've already suggested that this should be using the SoC
> infrastructure to export this information, which was explicitly designed
> to do this.

Absolutely.  If a mechanism is already in place then it should be used.


Nicolas