From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: linux@arm.linux.org.uk (Russell King - ARM Linux) Date: Tue, 6 Sep 2011 12:03:11 +0100 Subject: [PATCH 1/5] ARM: Samsung: PWM: Allow to differentiate SoCs based on platform device name. In-Reply-To: <1660939.8M3FnZsmga@flatron> References: <1731819.jJi37IsjvJ@flatron> <1645899.rJz3R6pebo@flatron> <1660939.8M3FnZsmga@flatron> Message-ID: <20110906110311.GM6619@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Tue, Sep 06, 2011 at 12:41:07PM +0200, Tomasz Figa wrote: > On Thursday 01 of September 2011 at 13:18:32, Tomasz Figa wrote: > > Well, now we have three alternatives: > > - to leave it as is (i.e. changing platform device names) > > - to use cpu_is_* (does it ever exist for S3C64xx or soc_is_s3c64xx is its equivalent?) > > - to use soc_is_* > > > > Waiting for more comments then. > > > Ping. > > Should I keep it as is or rather change it to use soc_is_s3c64xx instead? I don't know what question you're asking (the questions don't make sense in terms of the quoted context.) If you're asking whether you should use a cpu_ prefix instead of a soc_ prefix for identifying s3c64xx, then consider the question. What is the CPU? What are S3C64xx / OMAP / PXA310 / SA-11x0 / AT91RM9200? CPU or SoC ? What are Cortex A8/A9 / Xscale / StrongARM / ARM920? CPU or SoC ?