Porting RapidIO from ppc arch to powerpc arch in support of MPC8641D

Segher Boessenkool segher at kernel.crashing.org
Thu May 24 09:17:20 EST 2007


> OK, but if the device tree is not allowed to dictate policy, to use
> Segher's term, just hardware characteristics, how does that help us get
> the embedded soc kernels away from being designed and built to specific
> demo/eval board setups and make them more configurable?

I don't see the problem really.  Could you point out one
specific problem, and then we solve it?  Repeat as necessary.

> I got the impression that to some extent thats how you/we/?? were 
> trying
> to use the dts stuff. If my board is exactly like freescales xyz demo
> board except I move my rio map to here, my pci map to here, change a 
> few
> sizes etc., why do I have to go and patchup the arch setup code, modify
> ppc_md routines, etc.

That shouldn't be necessary.

> Isn't the plan that I just edit the dts, compile
> with dtc and have u-boot pass in the dtb to the stock kernel and its
> boots on my board?

Mostly, yes.

> If dts can't do this because its not allowed policy statements then 
> what
> will do this?

You pass policy decisions to the kernel some other way.  Like,
on the kernel command line, for example.

> Segher is right,

Yes, I always am.

> Please I'm not trying to start up any previous turf wars here,

Much appreciated!

--

Okay, if I am to help at all here, please someone explain what
"law"s and mboxes and doorbells are (in the context of rapidio).
Also how they are used, etc.


Segher




More information about the Linuxppc-dev mailing list