[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5098F385.6020009@ti.com>
Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2012 16:54:53 +0530
From: Mugunthan V N <mugunthanvnm@...com>
To: "Bedia, Vaibhav" <vaibhav.bedia@...com>
CC: "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com>,
Paul Walmsley <paul@...an.com>,
"devicetree-discuss@...ts.ozlabs.org"
<devicetree-discuss@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
"Hiremath, Vaibhav" <hvaibhav@...com>,
"linux-omap@...r.kernel.org" <linux-omap@...r.kernel.org>,
"davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/7] ARM: OMAP3+: hwmod: Add AM33XX HWMOD data for davinci_mdio
module
On 11/6/2012 3:39 PM, Bedia, Vaibhav wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 06, 2012 at 13:42:21, N, Mugunthan V wrote:
> [...]
>> +struct omap_hwmod_addr_space am33xx_mdio_addr_space[] = {
>> + {
>> + .pa_start = 0x4A101000,
>> + .pa_end = 0x4A101000 + SZ_256 - 1,
>> + .flags = ADDR_MAP_ON_INIT,
> Based on the recent discussions and looking the hwmod code,
> I guess ADDR_MAP_ON_INIT does not make sense here. Since you
> are just creating a parent-child relationship here, maybe no
> flag is needed?
>
>> + },
>> + { }
>> +};
>> +
>> +struct omap_hwmod_ocp_if am33xx_cpgmac0__mdio = {
>> + .master = &am33xx_cpgmac0_hwmod,
>> + .slave = &am33xx_mdio_hwmod,
>> + .addr = am33xx_mdio_addr_space,
>> + .user = OCP_USER_MPU,
> Is this flag necessary? Shouldn't you just skip the
> user field since there's nothing for the hwmod code
> to do here?
>
>
Will remove the unnecessary flags and submit the patch.
Regards
Mugunthan V N
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists