Patch moving latest linux-galileo common & ev64260 code to 2_4_devel
Mark A. Greer
mgreer at mvista.com
Wed Jan 15 10:47:20 EST 2003
Tom Rini wrote:
>I've applied all of this, in the interest of getting things back into
>sync.
>
Thanks.
>What I want to know 'tho, is why is there still the 'reg base' being
>either here or there. How hard would it be to always have it at the
>'other' location? Or, was it decided that it was best to allow this to
>end up anywhere?
>
There wasn't a decision per se but there were 2 versions of DINK and
different versions of PPCBoot that left the bridge at different
locations so I made the "incoming" base address configurable to
anywhere (but with different default for PPCBoot vs. something else).
Also, people wanted the base moved to different locations for the kernel
so I made the "outgoing" base address configurable as well.
Note: The linuxppc bootwrapper is what takes the "incoming" base address
& moves it to the specified "outgoing" base address.
I sort of like having that flexibility but then I seem to like config
options more than others here so... I can get rid of the different
defaults and have included a patch to do so. Is that enough?
>Also, I would really like to see the if/else of PPCBoot go away in favor
>of something like parsing PPCBoot, if it exists, and if not setting up
>things the 'other' way. ie:
>platform_init(...) {
> if (r3 == ppcboot)
> parse_ppcboot()
> else
> find_things_out()
> ...
>}
>
>find_things_out() {
> bd_t.memsize = gt64260_find_end_of_memory();
> ...
>}
>
>IOW, if we don't have PPCBoot and it's 'bd_t', fill it out.[1]
>
I suppose but there is code that can be ifdef'd out which makes the
executable smaller. Isn't it worth keeping them for that reason?
>
>[1] And of course this brings us to bi_recs, which is another
>flamewar^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^Hdiscussion.
>
I've totally punted on this for the same reason...
Mark
-------------- next part --------------
An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: cfg.diff
URL: <http://lists.ozlabs.org/pipermail/linuxppc-dev/attachments/20030114/43f35112/attachment.txt>
More information about the Linuxppc-dev
mailing list