Re: [PATCH v4 3/4] OMAP2+: use control module mfd driver in omap_type

[Sergei Shtylyov <sshtylyov@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Hello.

On 25-07-2012 15:05, Konstantin Baydarov wrote:

> OMAP system control module can be probed early, then
> omap_type is safe to use its APIs.

> TODO: add support for other omap versions

> Signed-off-by: Eduardo Valentin <eduardo.valentin@xxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Konstantin Baydarov <kbaidarov@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>   arch/arm/mach-omap2/id.c |   11 ++++++-----
>   1 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)

> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/id.c b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/id.c
> index 40373db..8018cad 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/id.c
> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/id.c
[...]
> @@ -43,15 +44,15 @@ int omap_type(void)
>   	u32 val = 0;
>
>   	if (cpu_is_omap24xx()) {
> -		val = omap_ctrl_readl(OMAP24XX_CONTROL_STATUS);
> +		val = omap_control_status_read();
>   	} else if (soc_is_am33xx()) {
> -		val = omap_ctrl_readl(AM33XX_CONTROL_STATUS);
> +		val = omap_control_status_read();
>   	} else if (cpu_is_omap34xx()) {
> -		val = omap_ctrl_readl(OMAP343X_CONTROL_STATUS);
> +		val = omap_control_status_read();
>   	} else if (cpu_is_omap44xx()) {
> -		val = omap_ctrl_readl(OMAP4_CTRL_MODULE_CORE_STATUS);
> +		val = omap_control_status_read();

   Isn't it better to merge now identical code into one *if*?

WBR, Sergei


_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel