Messages in this thread | | | Subject | RE: [RFC][PATCH 03/10] arm: mxc: changes to common plat-mxc codetoadd support for i.MX5 | Date | Mon, 7 Dec 2009 14:21:42 -0700 | From | "Herring Robert-RA7055" <> |
| |
Robert,
> -----Original Message----- > From: Robert Schwebel [mailto:r.schwebel@pengutronix.de] > Sent: Monday, December 07, 2009 2:03 PM > To: Herring Robert-RA7055 > Cc: Sascha Hauer; Amit Kucheria; List Linux Kernel; > grant.likely@secretlab.ca; valentin.longchamp@epfl.ch; > daniel@caiaq.de; Nguyen Dinh-R00091; > linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org > Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 03/10] arm: mxc: changes to common > plat-mxc codetoadd support for i.MX5 > > Rob, > > On Mon, Dec 07, 2009 at 10:17:52AM -0700, Herring Robert-RA7055 wrote: > > Sorry, my mistake. Sasha is correct that MX27 is v1 and MX25 is v2. > > > > timer_is_v1 is just !timer_is_v2, so really only one is > needed. I would > > define it like this to avoid having to change the timer > code again for > > any new chips: > > > > #define timer_is_v2() (!(cpu_is_mx1() || cpu_is_mx21() || > > cpu_is_mx27())) > > Are you sure that FSL won't invent a v3 timer in the future?
There is no change on my radar, and it has not changed in 5 years. As long as I'm around it won't change if I can help it. What is coming are chips with a mixture of i.MX and stmp (Sigmatel) blocks. So there could be a chip with the stmp timer, but it is completely different anyway.
Regards, Rob
> > rsc > -- > Pengutronix e.K. | > | > Industrial Linux Solutions | > http://www.pengutronix.de/ | > Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: > +49-5121-206917-0 | > Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: > +49-5121-206917-5555 | > >
| |