trini at kernel.crashing.org
Thu Apr 11 01:17:41 EST 2002
On Wed, Apr 10, 2002 at 10:27:05AM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Apr 2002, Michael Sokolov wrote:
> > Tom Rini <trini at kernel.crashing.org> wrote:
> > > Most of the code is actually rather
> > > clean. The Sandpoint is actally a good candidate for some sort of run-time
> > > checks since it's a development board and the X2/X3 (and X3b) do differ in
> > > some ways. I actually think the Spruce thing is a red-herring, but maybe the
> > > Spurce Paul/David Gibson have is different than the one mporter has access to.
> > But the point is that these two ports as they are right now aren't suitable for
> > CONFIG_GENERIC_PPC32 because of #ifdefs in them. An #ifdef-ectomy would mean
> > splitting the Sandpoint port into two ports, X2 and X3 with different _machine
> > codes, selected at run time. I don't know what to do for the Spruce. Does that
> > board have a spec saying what the baud clock is supposed to be? If there is,
> > assume the value from the spec and fix the boards that don't meet the spec. If
> > there is no right value and both values are equally legit, that's a screwed-up
> > board that standard OSes like Debian Linux/PPC don't need to support, so don't
> > bother putting it in the generic kernel.
> Can't you pass the X parameter and the baud clock to the kernel, either using
> the kernel command line or a bi_rec? On Amiga we pass things like VBLANK,
> E-clock, and power supply frequencies as well (using bi_recs).
>From PPCBoot/StarMON/other linux knowing firmware, yes. From
arch/ppc/boot we'd still have to compile it in and then pass it.
Tom Rini (TR1265)
** Sent via the linuxppc-dev mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/
More information about the Linuxppc-dev