[PATCH][RFT] please use this one

[Kumar Gala]

On Oct 21, 2005, at 1:43 PM, Rupert Eibauer wrote:

> On Friday 21 October 2005 17:23, Kumar Gala wrote:
>
>>
>> On Oct 21, 2005, at 10:11 AM, Rupert Eibauer wrote:
>>
>>
>>> On Friday 21 October 2005 16:28, Kumar Gala wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> The concept of PPC_HIGH_BATS is already some what handled with
>>>> CPU_FTR_HAS_HIGH_BATS.  I recommend you use this feature instead of
>>>> introducing another one as well as a compile time option.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> CPU_FTR_HAS_HIGH_BATS only clears the high bats, but does
>>> not attempt to use them. My patch will use them.
>>>
>>
>> I understand, I'm suggesting you expand CPU_FTR_HAS_HIGH_BATS to
>> include your additional functionality.
>>
>
> How do you mean that exactly?
>
> Do you mean making the feature always-on (not selectable in Kconfig)?
> Having CONFIG_PPC_LARGE_BATS and CONFIG_HIGH_PATS always-on would
> be ok for me, but for PHYS_64BIT should be left up to the platform
> to decide if it should be presented to the user or not.

Yes, I think just making support for BATS 4-7 always on and use  
CONFIG_FTR_HAS_HIGH_BATS for any runtime fixup.

> Do you think the other two features, CPU_FTR_BIG_PHYS and
> CPU_FTR_LARGE_BATS should be merged into one bit? They could for now,
> because there is no processor supporting only one of them.

Yes, this should still be a config option.  Merging  
CPU_FTR_LARGE_BATS into CPU_FTR_BIG_PHYS should be ok.

- kumar