[PATCH 5/6] PowerPC 440EPx: Sequoia board support

[Kumar Gala]

On Aug 2, 2007, at 3:32 PM, Josh Boyer wrote:

> On Wed, 1 Aug 2007 15:05:42 +1000
> David Gibson <david at gibson.dropbear.id.au> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Aug 01, 2007 at 07:01:17AM +0200, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
>>>>> +	{ /* 440EPX  - without Security/Kasumi  */
>>>>> +		.pvr_mask		= 0xf0000fff,
>>>>> +		.pvr_value		= 0x200008D4,
>>>>> +		.cpu_name		= "440EPX - no Security/Kasumi",
>>>>> +		.cpu_features		= CPU_FTRS_44X,
>>>>> +		.cpu_user_features	= COMMON_USER_BOOKE |  
>>>>> PPC_FEATURE_HAS_FPU, /*
>>>>> 440EPX has an FPU */
>>>>> +		.icache_bsize		= 32,
>>>>> +		.dcache_bsize		= 32,
>>>>> +	},
>>>>
>>>> Since the with/without Security/Kasumi versions have no  
>>>> differences in
>>>> their cputable entry other than the PVR, couldn't you just  
>>>> remove the
>>>> relevant PVR bit from the mask and use a single entry?
>>>
>>> And get rid of the stupid "has an FPU" comment at the same time
>>> please :-)
>>
>> Actually that comment may be worthwhile if expanded a little.  I  
>> think
>> the point is that 440EPx *unlike most other 4xx chips* has an  
>> FPU.  So
>> the point of the comment is not explaining the feature bit, which is
>> obvious, but as a "no, really, it does".
>
> Right.  440EP(x) are the only currently available 44x chips that
> contain an FPU, so I also think the comment can stay.

I agree w/Segher the comment is redundant.  Just make a note of the  
fact that we really have FPU in the commit message.

- k