Hi Stefano,

On Tue, Sep 01, 2015 at 09:28:40AM +0200, Stefano Babic wrote:

Hi Peng,

On 01/09/2015 03:40, Peng Fan wrote:

...

Since we need to support runtime check for different drivers, we need to add get_cpu_rev for vf610.

This patch only introduce a empty implementation to avoid build errors, later more stuff can be added if need to check vf610 cpu types.

Signed-off-by: Peng Fan Peng.Fan@freescale.com Cc: Stefano Babic sbabic@denx.de

---

arch/arm/cpu/armv7/vf610/generic.c | 11 +++++++++++ 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+)

diff --git a/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/vf610/generic.c b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/vf610/generic.c index 05c401d..bd948cb 100644 --- a/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/vf610/generic.c +++ b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/vf610/generic.c @@ -266,6 +266,17 @@ void imx_get_mac_from_fuse(int dev_id, unsigned char *mac) } #endif

+/*

• • Empty function
• • Several drivers use runtime check, which needs get_cpu_rev.
• • If later we need to do runtime check for vf610, we can add
• • more stuff here.
• */

+u32 get_cpu_rev(void) +{

• return 0;

+}

#if defined(CONFIG_DISPLAY_CPUINFO) static char *get_reset_cause(void) {

If there is really no way to get the cpu revision from the SOC, I suggest we use the same approach of MXC_CPU_MX6SOLO with a "dummy" cpu. Something like :

#define MXC_CPU_VF610 0xF6 /* dummy CPU */

"F6" from vF610, of course, instead of returning 0.

I not have vf610 board in hand and need to check with others about this. Not sure when I can get the result. So now for quick fix, using your way with your Suggested-by. Later, if I can get the results, can use another patch to fix the cpu type, because build errors should be at high priority to be fixed. What do you think?

Regards, Peng.

Best regards, Stefano Babic

--

DENX Software Engineering GmbH, Managing Director: Wolfgang Denk HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany Phone: +49-8142-66989-53 Fax: +49-8142-66989-80 Email: sbabic@denx.de =====================================================================

--