benh at kernel.crashing.org
Wed Mar 9 13:01:35 EST 2005
On Mon, 2005-03-07 at 12:30 +0000, James Chapman wrote:
> Hi Nicolas,
> A few general comments:-
> - mv64x60 stuff is best posted to linuxppc-embedded
> - you change several generic files to support your platform. It should
> be possible to support new mv64x60 platforms by writing a new
> xxx_setup.c file in arch/ppc/platforms with no other generic changes.
> It is a goal that all mv64x60 boards can be supported by the generic
> code in arch/ppc/syslib. If some changes need to be made outside
> arch/ppc/platforms to support your board, try to make them generic so
> that other similar boards would be able to use them. I suggest you
> clone chrp_setup.c or katana.c rather than adding conditionals in
> chrp_setup.c for your board. Then use code in your board specific
> setup file to call arch/ppc/syslib mv64x60 routines as appropriate.
Welcome to the world of embedded people who use #ifdef's for their
Pegasos claims to be chrp compliant, and so uses chrp_setup.c and relies
on other chrp related bits. The point here is to limit the platform
specific code and use the device-tree as much as is possible. Though I
agree that Nicals patch introduce wrong dependencies (I need to do a
deeper review of it).
If chrp_setup.c indeed ends up beeing cluttered by too much Pegasos
specific stuff, then it will be time to do split pegasos to a different
platform type as part of CONFIG_PPC_MULTIPLATFORM.
Now as far as his patch is concernd, the whole is_pegasos2() stuff is
too ugly for words, I agree. If he really needs so, then he should add
an argument to mv64x60_init() in order to customize it's behaviour.
Though I haven't looked at the code to see why he's trying to skip
> - you shouldn't need to add board-specific changes in mv643xx_eth.c.
> Setup device platform data for your board in your platform file.
> If something needs to be added to the platform data for a generic
> change to mv643xx_eth, do that rather than add platform conditionals
> in the driver.
Agreed, though I think that's almost there now.
> - why do you need to use SA_SHIRQ in the ethernet driver?
Why don't use use it ? SA_INTERRUPT is crap and should probably be
removed from the driver.
> Nicolas DET wrote:
> > Hello Sven,
> > On 07/03/2005, you wrote:
> >>But i hear Nicolas has done some useful work yesterday evening, i will
> >>review it as soon as he is back from dreamland :)
> > You can find the patch against 2.6.11 from kernel.org here:
> > http://powernico.free.fr/patch_2.6.11_mv64x60.diff.bz2
> > This patch shouldn't break mv code for others platform (non PegasosII), and
> > fix Pegasos II init...
> > Basicly, I added mv64360_ispegasos2() in include/asm-ppc/mv64x60.h. Then:
> > in arch/ppc/syslibs/mv64360_pic.c, I skip the IRQ init code
> > in arch/ppc/syslibs/mv64x60.c, I skip all the chip init & patch the
> > ressources tables for Pegasos II hardware (register base & IRQ).
> > in include/asm-ppc/mv64x60.h: added mv64360_ispegasos2()
> > in arch/ppc/kernel/chrp_setup.c, rename/added pegasos2_stuff() and call
> > mv64x60_init() if CONFIG_MV64x60
> > in drivers/net/mv64xx_eth.c, use SA_SHIRQ instead of SA_INTERRUPT for
> > request_irq if pegasos II detected
> > The only thing to do is to add mv64360_ispegasos2() in include/asm-mips/...
> > because I use this function to use the correct flags in the ethernet
> > driver.
> > Of course, this patch may be discuss as there are several architecture
> > using Marvell chipsets and each requieres some specific code.
> > I don't know where it's the best to place mv64360_ispeasos2(), maybe this
> > func could even be renamed mv64x60_ispegasos2()..
> > Please, people from others MV64x60 architectures review this patch, modify
> > if it neeeded and check it doesn't break your architecture (I shouldn't but
> > for MIPS ethernet).
> > Regards
> Linuxppc-dev mailing list
> Linuxppc-dev at ozlabs.org
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh at kernel.crashing.org>
More information about the Linuxppc-dev