Organisation of 4xx initialization code
Tom Rini
trini at kernel.crashing.org
Sat Nov 17 04:29:49 EST 2001
On Fri, Nov 16, 2001 at 09:07:05AM -0700, Mark Pilon wrote:
>
> some issues:
> - mem mapped and DCRs have moved around, been added or taken away when
> going from the 405gp to pm.
>
> - functional differneces exist between the parts as well: one example
> being the GP has 5 ethernet interrupts mapped into the UIC, while
> the PM they're all rolled into 1 int.
>
> - there may be silicon errata which affect one processor which have
> been worked out of another.
>
> - and the cards are different as well ...
>
> for ease of replicating this port when the next kernel comes along,
> I came down on the side of really isolating everything I'm adding:
> 1bm405pm.h instead of ibm405gp.h,
That's exactly how it should go too. And did you add in a CONFIG_405PM?
405GP things _should_ be CONFIG_405GP'ed. If not please post a patch
for them.
> my own board and architecture setup funcs in their own module ...
> my own head_ppc405pm.S ....
Were these actually needed?
> my 0.0002: an approach which isolates chip-specific funcs in a
> chip-specific module, same for board-specific. this adds maintenance
> as the flavors for a given processor grow. maybe there's a more clever
> way to do this w/o globbing up a few files w/ many ifdefs.
Which is sort-of where things are going, but haven't yet. The sooner
you post your port the sooner I can think about things too and see what
needs to be seperated out more.
--
Tom Rini (TR1265)
http://gate.crashing.org/~trini/
** Sent via the linuxppc-embedded mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/
More information about the Linuxppc-embedded
mailing list