On Tue, Apr 27, 2010 at 05:01:30PM +0200, Balbi Felipe (Nokia-D/Helsinki) wrote: > On Tue, Apr 27, 2010 at 03:14:13PM +0200, Valentin Eduardo (Nokia-D/Helsinki) > wrote: > >From: Eduardo Valentin <[email protected]> > > > >Report OMAP2,3,4 data into system_soc_info. Now we get omap > >information under /proc/cpuinfo. > > > >Signed-off-by: Eduardo Valentin <[email protected]> > >--- > > arch/arm/mach-omap2/id.c | 21 +++++++++++++++------ > > 1 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) > > > >diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/id.c b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/id.c > >index 37b8a1a..75e36a5 100644 > >--- a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/id.c > >+++ b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/id.c > >@@ -152,10 +152,15 @@ void __init omap24xx_check_revision(void) > > j = i; > > } > > > >- pr_info("OMAP%04x", omap_rev() >> 16); > >- if ((omap_rev() >> 8) & 0x0f) > >- pr_info("ES%x", (omap_rev() >> 12) & 0xf); > >- pr_info("\n"); > >+ snprintf(system_soc_info, SYSTEM_SOC_INFO_SIZE, "OMAP%04x", > >+ omap_rev() >> 16); > >+ if ((omap_rev() >> 8) & 0x0f) { > >+ int sz = strlen(system_soc_info); > > how about you use the return of the first snprintf instead of asking > strlen() here ? I mean:
Yeah, > > int sz = snprintf(system_soc_info, SYSTEM_SOC_INFO_SIZE, "OMAP%04x", > omap_rev() >> 16); > > if ((omap_rev() >> 8) & 0x0f) > snprintf(system_soc_info + sz, SYSTEM_SOC_INFO_SIZE - sz, > "ES%x", (omap_rev() >> 12) & 0x0f); > > would that work ??? I think so, yeah. No need to recompute the string length twice. Will resend soon. > > -- > balbi > > DefectiveByDesign.org > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in > the body of a message to [email protected] > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
