[PATCH 10/11] Add MPC8360EMDS board support

[Li Yang-r58472]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Vitaly Bordug [mailto:vbordug at ru.mvista.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, September 27, 2006 8:56 PM
> To: Li Yang-r58472
> Cc: Paul Mackerras; linuxppc-dev at ozlabs.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 10/11] Add MPC8360EMDS board support
> 
> On Wed, 27 Sep 2006 20:02:56 +0800
> "Li Yang-r58472" <LeoLi at freescale.com> wrote:
> 
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Vitaly Bordug [mailto:vbordug at ru.mvista.com]
> > > Sent: Wednesday, September 27, 2006 7:56 PM
> > > To: Paul Mackerras
> > > Cc: Li Yang-r58472; linuxppc-dev at ozlabs.org
> > > Subject: Re: [PATCH 10/11] Add MPC8360EMDS board support
> > >
> > > On Wed, 27 Sep 2006 16:39:11 +1000
> > > Paul Mackerras <paulus at samba.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Li Yang writes:
> > > >
> > > > > +#define BCSR_PHYS_ADDR		((uint)0xf8000000)
> > > > > +#define BCSR_SIZE		((uint)(32 * 1024))
> > > >
> > > > This sort of thing should really be in the device tree.
> > > >
> > > Just a suggestion, but for the similar aim in pq2 I have those
stuff
> > in memory node :
> > >
> > > +memory {
> > > +               device_type = "memory";
> > > +               linux,phandle = <300>;
> > > +               reg = <00000000 4000000 f4500000 00000020>;
> > > +       };
> > > the second pair is about bcsr and its size.
> > >
> > > Just in case this may help (and wondering if I'm not violating
> > something :) )
> >
> > Well, this can make it work.  But I would prefer to use a new node
> > because the BCSR is by no means a memory type of device.  I have
made my
> > change to use node like this:
> >
> >         bcsr at f8000000 {
> >                 device_type = "board-control";
> >                 reg = <f8000000 8000>;
> >         };
> >
> 
> I though about that approach, but saw somewhere a reference that we
should not summon
> new node types without utter necessity, and utilized memory because
bcsr is
> memory-mapped stuff. I can hardly imagine bcsr as a device (which
would require
> respective spec inclusion btw).

Well I didn't see such a guideline.  However BCSR is truly a device like
any other peripherals on board.  Usually it is an FPGA on local bus to
control the board.
> 
> hence let's open a discussion what others think about that. The
problem seems common
> (and for some boards
> is called somewhat else apparently), but at this point we should come
to some
> conclusion, document it, and use it.

Agreed.  As we are adding more devices to the device tree, we should
also have a guideline clearly stated for adding new nodes.  

I'm adding MURAM as a new node under QE bus.  Please comment.
                muram at 10000 {
                        device_type = "memory";
                        ranges = <0 00010000 0000c000>;

                        data-only at 0{
                                reg = <0 c000>;
                        };
                };

- Leo