From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from mail-ig0-x232.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4001:c05::232]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.80.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1YpKjW-0003ao-UY for barebox@lists.infradead.org; Mon, 04 May 2015 18:04:47 +0000 Received: by igblo3 with SMTP id lo3so88796014igb.0 for ; Mon, 04 May 2015 11:04:25 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20150504070119.GJ6325@pengutronix.de> References: <1430619980-26243-1-git-send-email-andrew.smirnov@gmail.com> <1430619980-26243-8-git-send-email-andrew.smirnov@gmail.com> <20150504070119.GJ6325@pengutronix.de> Date: Mon, 4 May 2015 11:04:25 -0700 Message-ID: From: Andrey Smirnov List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "barebox" Errors-To: barebox-bounces+u.kleine-koenig=pengutronix.de@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/8] i.MX: serial: Distil common clock ungating code To: Sascha Hauer Cc: "barebox@lists.infradead.org" > Please add a imx6_ namespace to this function. The calling code always > knows that it is running on imx6, so you can use IMX6_CCM_BASE_ADDR > directly rather than using soc##_. The function above is imx6 specific > anyway since only this SoC has the gate registers on 0x68..0x80. What about i.MX51? As far as I can tell it is the same as i.MX6 in this aspect. This function wouldn't have any consumers on i.MX51 architecture, of course, but shouldn't this function have a SoC variant agnostic name, just for the sake of genericity? > > Sascha > > -- > 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 | _______________________________________________ barebox mailing list barebox@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox