On Mon, 2011-01-24 at 13:30 -0800, David Brown wrote:
On Mon, Jan 24 2011, Daniel Walker wrote:
quoted
On Wed, 2011-01-19 at 12:25 -0800, David Brown wrote:
quoted
diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-msm/include/mach/cpu.h
b/arch/arm/mach-msm/include/mach/cpu.h
index e1ba9db..a9481b0 100644
--- a/arch/arm/mach-msm/include/mach/cpu.h
+++ b/arch/arm/mach-msm/include/mach/cpu.h
@@ -24,6 +24,7 @@
#define cpu_is_msm7x30() 0
#define cpu_is_qsd8x50() 0
#define cpu_is_msm8x60() 0
+#define cpu_is_msm8960() 0
The naming is just perverted even more here..
What do you want me to call it?
#define cpu_is_97d0c886-3768-4998-8925-16f36209d0d1()
I want you to call it msm8x60 ..
It's the name of the chip. We've already been through this. The names
are unfortunate, but it is what the devices are called.
I think you can re-org things to mask all this.. I've been suggesting is
that we look into that ..
Daniel
--
Sent by a consultant of the Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum.