[PATCH] Start arch/powerpc/boot code reorganization
Mark A. Greer
mgreer at mvista.com
Fri Sep 22 11:24:08 EST 2006
On Thu, Sep 21, 2006 at 05:31:18PM +0200, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> >Regardless of the name of the
> >new property, it should be defined to allow a different number of
> >address cells to represent an address in virtual address space.
>
> How about you check whether the "64-bit" property exists in the CPU
> nodes?
That seemed like the right thing until I realized, its still specifying
the physical size, not the virtual size.
I don't think we can avoid making a new xxx-cells property for the virt
addr size. Ben suggested adding #virt-address-cells to the root node.
I like the name but prefer putting it directly under "/cpus" because
the virt addr size is really determined by the cpu. It doesn't matter
that much to me, though.
Comments?
Mark
More information about the Linuxppc-dev
mailing list