thoughts and questions on 8xx patches

Robert P. J. Day rpjday at
Tue Sep 21 21:06:53 EST 2004

On Tue, 21 Sep 2004, Wolfgang Denk wrote:

> In message <Pine.LNX.4.60.0409210605090.9033 at> you wrote:
>>    rather than get into more detailed discussion on microcode patches,
>> here's a (partial) patch that represents what i'd really, really,
>> *really* like to see.
> ...
>> +config I2C_SPI_PATCH
>> +	bool "I2C/SPI relocation patch"
>> +
>> +config I2C_SPI_SMC1_PATCH
>> +	bool "I2C/SPI/SMC1 relocation patch"
> Why? As far as I understand the I2C/SPI patch has been obsolteted  by
> the I2C/SPI/SMC1 patch. So only the latter is needed.

uh huh.  even though, as i've already pointed out, the code in 
micropatch.c in *both* your source tree and the linuxppc-2.5 tree is 
broken in that, if you applied the SMC patch, it would have (AFAICT) 
caused a conflict because of an erroneously low value of RPBASE.

it's a bit presumptuous to declare that a broken patch has obsoleted 
one that actually works, don't you think?


More information about the Linuxppc-dev mailing list