On Sun, Nov 24, 2013 at 11:46 PM, Lokesh Vutla lokeshvutla@ti.com wrote:
On Friday 22 November 2013 01:56 AM, Vaibhav Bedia wrote:
On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 1:18 AM, Lokesh Vutla lokeshvutla@ti.com wrote: [...]
#define NON_SECURE_SRAM_START 0x402F0400 #define NON_SECURE_SRAM_END 0x40340000 #define SRAM_SCRATCH_SPACE_ADDR 0x4033C000 +#define AM4372_BOARD_NAME_START SRAM_SCRATCH_SPACE_ADDR +#define AM4372_BOARD_NAME_END SRAM_SCRATCH_SPACE_ADDR + 0xC
Why do you need to keep the struct address hardcoded like this?
FYI, this is not struct address. This is the place where where I am storing board name. This helps in detecting the board. It ll be good to understand the code properly and comment.
My bad. Should have looked closer.
[...]
+static inline int board_is_eposevm(void) +{
return !strncmp(am43xx_board_name, "AM43EPOS", HDR_NAME_LEN);+}
+static inline int board_is_gpevm(void) +{
return !strncmp(am43xx_board_name, "AM43__GP", HDR_NAME_LEN);+}
Looks like you got the EEPROM content updated ;)
There is nothing updated. This is what I have used previously. Please recollect your comments properly.
Well it would help if you added in a more detailed changelog for the different variants of the patches highlighting what's changed and if some comment is being ignored the reason for the same.
Regards, Vaibhav