[PATCH 1/2] Added support for PRTLVT based boards (MPC5121)

[David Jander]

On Wednesday 11 June 2008 19:58:32 Scott Wood wrote:
> Pass -B -M -C to git-format-patch to detect renames, copies, etc.

Thanks for the hint. I am still a git-noob ;-)

>[...]
> This is an old flash binding.  Please use the one currently described in
> Documentation/booting-without-of.txt.

Thanks again, I was searching for documentation about dts, and couldn't find 
much.

> > +		//axe at 2000 {
> > +		//	compatible = "mpc512x-axe";
> > +		//	reg = <2000 100>;
> > +		//	interrupts = <2a 8>;
> > +		//	interrupt-parent = < &ipic >;
> > +		//};
>
> Why is this here, but commented out?

Hmm, I know we are going to use it, but there are no drivers still...
I'll leave it out, and add it again later when axe-support has arrived.

> > +		dma2 at 14000 {
> > +			compatible = "fsl,mpc5121-dma2";
>
> Is this DMA controller compatible with drivers/dma/fsldma.c?  If so,
> follow the established binding.

No, it's not compatible with any other dma controller AFAIK. It special for 
this chip. John Rigby is writing the driver for it right now.

> > +config MPC5121_GENERIC
> > +	bool
> > +	default n
> > +
> >  config MPC5121_ADS
> >  	bool "Freescale MPC5121E ADS"
> >  	depends on PPC_MULTIPLATFORM && PPC32
> >  	select DEFAULT_UIMAGE
> >  	select PPC_MPC5121
> > +	select MPC5121_GENERIC
> >  	help
> >  	  This option enables support for the MPC5121E ADS board.
> >  	default n
> > +
> > +config PRTLVT
> > +	bool "Protonic LVT family of MPC5121 based boards"
> > +	depends on PPC_MULTIPLATFORM && PPC32
> > +	select DEFAULT_UIMAGE
> > +	select PPC_MPC5121
> > +	select MPC5121_GENERIC
> > +	help
> > +	  This option enables support for the Protonic LVT family (ZANMCU and
> > VICVT2). +	default n
>
> Can we leave out the "default n" lines?  They're no-ops.

Ok, I removed also several others (all of them in this file). I hope that it 
is not a problem not making this a separate patch?

> I don't think these configs should depend on an option
> (PPC_MULTIPLATFORM) that is described as "Generic desktop/server/laptop"...

I think right now they need to. That's the way someone broke...err changed 
platform selection.

We should fix that later, but I don't really know what would be the right way 
to fix this right now. I'll think about it after this...

Btw, is it ok I just re-submit the fixed patches (with cc to linuxppc-dev)?

Thanks.

Greetings,

-- 
David Jander
Protonic Holland.