Hi,
On 02.06.2014 14:35, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
Replace EXYNOS_BOOT_VECTOR_ADDR and EXYNOS_BOOT_VECTOR_FLAG macros by exynos_boot_vector_addr() and exynos_boot_vector_flag() static inlines.
This patch shouldn't cause any functionality changes.
Signed-off-by: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz b.zolnierkie@samsung.com Acked-by: Kyungmin Park kyungmin.park@samsung.com
arch/arm/mach-exynos/pm.c | 28 ++++++++++++++++++++-------- 1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/pm.c b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/pm.c index 87c0d34..cf09383 100644 --- a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/pm.c +++ b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/pm.c @@ -166,12 +166,23 @@ int exynos_cluster_power_state(int cluster) S5P_CORE_LOCAL_PWR_EN); } -#define EXYNOS_BOOT_VECTOR_ADDR (samsung_rev() == EXYNOS4210_REV_1_1 ? \
S5P_INFORM7 : (samsung_rev() == EXYNOS4210_REV_1_0 ? \(sysram_base_addr + 0x24) : S5P_INFORM0))-#define EXYNOS_BOOT_VECTOR_FLAG (samsung_rev() == EXYNOS4210_REV_1_1 ? \
S5P_INFORM6 : (samsung_rev() == EXYNOS4210_REV_1_0 ? \(sysram_base_addr + 0x20) : S5P_INFORM1))+static inline void __iomem *exynos_boot_vector_addr(void) +{
- if (samsung_rev() == EXYNOS4210_REV_1_1)
return S5P_INFORM7;- else if (samsung_rev() == EXYNOS4210_REV_1_0)
return sysram_base_addr + 0x24;- return S5P_INFORM0;
I know this is not strictly related to this patch, but isn't a check whether the SoC is Exynos4210 also needed, before comparing the revision with Exynos4210-specific values?
Otherwise looks good.
Best regards, Tomasz