Re: [i2c] [PATCH] I2C bus driver for Philips ARM boards

[Vitaly Wool]

On Thu, 22 Jun 2006 23:26:00 +0100 (BST)
Mark Underwood <basicmark@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
 
> Would it not make sense to call this driver ip3204 or ph_ip3204 or some such seeing as you
> correctly point out that this is a common Philips IP block and is used in other, non pnx, chips?

No I don't think it would -- this is an internal Philips IP block number AFAIK and was given there only for reference.
Funny is that people from Philips Semi asked me about a year ago not to use internal IP block numbers in the code. I know you're also from Philips... Well, what does that prove? It proves that everything can't be in alignment in such a big company. ;-)
 
> I'm also not sure why the register map is in the arch-pnx4008 directory as this will require every
> chip that has this IP block to have a copy of the file.

IIRC, PNX5220 has a slightly different register map. Of course the main registers are the same but putting first N regs into common header and putting others into arch header would have made even less sense.

Vitaly
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/