[PATCH] Start arch/powerpc/boot code reorganization

[Mark A. Greer]

On Tue, Sep 26, 2006 at 01:40:15AM +0200, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> >>>All I'm try to say is that "fw,address" is just like the "reg"
> >>>property
> >>>except that it holds the effective addr not the physical addr and  
> >>>the
> >>>size of the address is determined by the existence of "/cpus/64-bit"
> >>>not #address-cells.  That's all.
> 
> >Okay, fair enough.  I think you understand what I was trying to say,
> >right?  If so, do you have any objections to it?
> 
> Yes: don't call it "<whatever>address", when you immediately say it
> is more like "reg".  How about "virtual-reg"?

Anyone have a problem with "virtual-reg"?