On Fri, 20 Nov 2009, M?ns Rullg?rd wrote:
> "Robert P. J. Day" <rpj...@crashcourse.ca> writes:
>
> > Make it clear to a reader that the user of OMAP34XX macros in the
> > (OMAP 3530-based) beagle config file is just fine.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Robert P. J. Day <rpj...@crashcourse.ca>
> >
> > ---
> >
> > i'll let dirk be the judge as to whether this is worth adding, or if
> > he'd prefer a different phrasing.
> >
> > diff --git a/include/configs/omap3_beagle.h b/include/configs/omap3_beagle.h
> > index 19a5ec9..9a03587 100644
> > --- a/include/configs/omap3_beagle.h
> > +++ b/include/configs/omap3_beagle.h
> > @@ -30,6 +30,9 @@
> >
> > /*
> > * High Level Configuration Options
> > + *
> > + * Note that, although the BeagleBoard incorporates an OMAP 3530,
> > + * it's currently still valid to use OMAP34XX preprocessor values.
> > */
> > #define CONFIG_ARMCORTEXA8 1 /* This is an ARM V7 CPU core */
> > #define CONFIG_OMAP 1 /* in a TI OMAP core */
>
> Since 34xx and 35xx are in fact exactly the same silicon, saying it is
> "currently" valid seems a bit odd. This sort of implies a planned
> change.
ok, i can rephrase that. i was working off of a post by dirk a
couple days ago where he seemed to be suggesting that the door was
open for some divergence down the road, but maybe i just misread.
will fix shortly.
rday
--
========================================================================
Robert P. J. Day Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA
Linux Consulting, Training and Kernel Pedantry.
Web page: http://crashcourse.ca
Twitter: http://twitter.com/rpjday
========================================================================
_______________________________________________
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
