[PATCH 1/3] fsl_soc.c cleanup
Scott Wood
scottwood at freescale.com
Wed Sep 12 01:51:40 EST 2007
Kumar Gala wrote:
> Yep. However, after some discussion with Segher on this for
> 83xx/85xx/86xx I think we want to keep the reg prop and have it cover
> the initial soc registers [size on 83xx is 0x100, size on 85xx/86xx
> would be 0x1000].
>
> What we need is a saner way to determine immr on 82xx & 8xx. Segher's
> rule is that a given "reg" prop shouldn't overlap w/any other reg. We
> currently violate that on 8xx. Not as clear on 82xx if we do that.
>
> I'm thinking on 8xx we should move to grabbing a top level compat value
> (mpc8xx) and use the SPRN_IMMR to set immrbase.
Any particular reason to special-case it, when we already need code to
do it the other way for every other fsl soc?
> On mpc82xx-pq2 we could
> add a immr "device" to search for.
Enh. The soc node *is* the immr "device". I'd rather add a node for
the "initial" registers (they generally don't involve configuring the
immr "bus" itself, but rather the chipselect bus and other miscellaneous
things) if needed, get rid of /soc/reg, and have ranges cover the whole
immr.
And why is 82xx-pq2 special? Wouldn't you need this on 83xx, 85xx, and
86xx as well?
-Scott
More information about the Linuxppc-dev
mailing list