Sergei,
  Thank you for the comments.

On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 16:18:17, Sergei Shtylyov wrote:

Hello.

On 17-11-2011 14:18, Manjunath Hadli wrote:

quoted

remove the code from individual platform header files for dm365, 
dm355, dm644x and dm646x and consolidate it into a single and common 
header file davinci_common.h.
Include the new header file in individual platform header files as a 
pre-cursor for deleting these headers in follow up patches.

quoted

Signed-off-by: Manjunath Hadli<redacted>

[...]

quoted

diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-davinci/include/mach/davinci.h 

b/arch/arm/mach-davinci/include/mach/davinci.h
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..49bf2f3

--- /dev/null
+++ b/arch/arm/mach-davinci/include/mach/davinci.h

@@ -0,0 +1,88 @@

[...]

quoted

+/* DM355 base addresses */
+#define DM355_ASYNC_EMIF_CONTROL_BASE	0x01e10000
+#define DM355_ASYNC_EMIF_DATA_CE0_BASE	0x02000000

quoted

+/* DM365 base addresses */
+#define DM365_ASYNC_EMIF_CONTROL_BASE	0x01d10000
+#define DM365_ASYNC_EMIF_DATA_CE0_BASE	0x02000000
+#define DM365_ASYNC_EMIF_DATA_CE1_BASE	0x04000000

    Note that DM355/365 EMIF CE0/1 bases are similar -- perhaps it's worth to have the single definition for them now, like DM3X5_ASYNC_EMIF_DATA_CE<n>_BASE.

There is only DM355 and DM365. DM3X5 has not been used anywhere till now.
Too much generalization in naming might lead to confusion?
I guess we will keep it as-is for the sake of clarity. What do you say?

WBR, Sergei

Thank s and Regards,
-Manju