Dear Stefano Babic,
On 17/06/2012 19:50, Otavio Salvador wrote:
On Sun, Jun 17, 2012 at 1:03 PM, Marek Vasut marex@denx.de wrote:
But really, I don't mind it being included or not. I did it because Marek has comment about it when looking at my initial mx23 patches.
And I like it more, it looks less like a typo.
Sorry; I didn't get what you meant ... should it go or not?
Hi Otavio,
I make also my point clearer for Marek: my point is that the behavior for all i.MX must be consistent. If you change here, please change also for i.MX31 (that returns "unknown in print_cpuinfo) and for other SOCs that returns "unknown" in print_cpuinfo() - or let the code as now.
Ah, I thought it was about the revision. Ok, whatever way is fine by me.
Best regards, Stefano
Best regards, Marek Vasut