[PATCH] CPM_UART: Fixed SMC handling for CPM2 processors
Vitaly Bordug
vbordug at ru.mvista.com
Wed Nov 8 01:47:41 EST 2006
On Tue, 7 Nov 2006 15:21:00 +0200 (EET)
Kalle Pokki wrote:
> On Tue, 7 Nov 2006, Vitaly Bordug wrote:
>
> > Well, yes, but are you _sure_ pram_base will be the same across all
> > the 82xx PQ2, that happen to have smc wired to Ethernet?
> >
> > If not I am considering storing it in the platform_data is better
> > approach.
>
> Yes, pram_base is always 0x87fc for SMC1 and 0x88fc for SMC2. This is
> for all PowerQUICC II families (8260, 8272, and 8280). I'm not sure
> how PQ2 Pro and PQ3 and handled, but I suspect they don't share these
> definitions.
>
ok
> Anyway, I'm only extending the already existing conventions to the
> platform device approach. These same decisions have already been made
> in the past and are used in the cpm_uart compat mode. It may be that
> Freescale someday releases a microcode patch that relocates the SMC
> parameter RAM, but even in this case it would be better to use the
> same approach with compat mode and platform device mode to avoid
> confusion.
>
> I could have used the numerical address offsets in the resource
> definition, but I wanted to emphasize the fact that the offsets are
> already defined by the DPRAM memory allocator (this is a little
> hackish, yes) instead of hardware directly requiring these exact
> values.
>
Aha, I recall now. There was nearly exactly the same discussion in the past.
The recap was since ppc_platform_devices[] approach is not flexible enough, revisit issue from the
arch/powerpc POV.
> This snippet is from cpm2.h:
>
> /* Dual Port RAM addresses. The first 16K is available for
> almost
> * any CPM use, so we put the BDs there. The first 128
> bytes are
> * used for SMC1 and SMC2 parameter RAM, so we start
> allocating
> * BDs above that. All of this must change when we start
> * downloading RAM microcode.
> */
> #define CPM_DATAONLY_BASE ((uint)128)
>
> My patch puts pram_base exactly here.
>
>
I know, the questionable thing was if there is enough "value" to add yet another platform device for that.
Since it improves current ppc being and sort of puts a note for powerpc port, I'm inclined to ACK.
Thanks,
-Vitaly
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://ozlabs.org/pipermail/linuxppc-embedded/attachments/20061107/f4ef40fb/attachment.pgp
More information about the Linuxppc-embedded
mailing list