[PATCH,RFC] Move Cell platform code to arch/powerpc

[Kumar Gala]

On Aug 31, 2005, at 7:47 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:

> Move all files from arch/ppc64/kernel/bpa_* to arch/powerpc/ 
> platforms/cell,
>
> I would like to see a patch like this go into 2.6.14, for multiple  
> reasons:
>
> - The marketing folks have changed the names and we are no longer  
> supposed
>   to refer to Cell as 'BPA' or 'Broadband Processor Architecture'.
>   The platform is officially known as 'Cell Broadband Engine  
> Architecture',
>   while the CPU is the 'Cell Broadband Engine'.
>
> - We are now moving all platforms into arch/powerpc/platforms and  
> someone
>   has to start so we get a template for the other architectures to  
> follow.
>
> - It would be a big mess for me to maintain my own patches on top  
> of file
>   names that are different from mainline during the 2.6.14 freeze.
>
> My impression is that Cell is a good target for moving first,  
> because I
> have to move it anyway and the number of users is extremely low, so it
> doesn't cause too much harm if we screw up. What thing that makes  
> moving
> Cell relatively easy is that it only supports 64 bit and only a single
> hardware configuration so far.
>
> I have tested this a bit on Cell and also done compile-only test  
> for the
> other platforms, but it doesn't really make any changes to the code  
> itself.
>
> Please comment on wether this is what everybody like the merge process
> be like.

I'm not 100% sure if this is the right time for introducing a  
platform into arch/powerpc.  My concern is around that fact that we  
have not tried to move any "code" from arch/ppc or arch/ppc64 into  
arch/powerpc and so havent figured out how we are going to do that  
will not breaking arch/ppc & arch/ppc64.  By introducing cell this  
way we create a dependency between ppc64 and powerpc that might  
constrain decisions we want to make.

> Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arndb at de.ibm.com>
>
> --
>  arch/powerpc/platforms/cell/Makefile     |    1
>  arch/ppc64/kernel/Makefile               |    5
>  arch/powerpc/platforms/cell/pic.c        |  269 +++++++++++++++++++ 
> +++
>  arch/ppc64/kernel/bpa_iic.c              |  270  
> ----------------------
>  include/asm-powerpc/cell-pic.h           |   62 +++++
>  arch/ppc64/kernel/bpa_iic.h              |   62 -----
>  arch/powerpc/platforms/cell/iommu.c      |  377 +++++++++++++++++++ 
> ++++++++++++
>  arch/ppc64/kernel/bpa_iommu.c            |  377  
> -------------------------------
>  arch/powerpc/platforms/cell/iommu.h      |   65 +++++
>  arch/ppc64/kernel/bpa_iommu.h            |   65 -----
>  arch/powerpc/platforms/cell/nvram.c      |  118 +++++++++
>  arch/ppc64/kernel/bpa_nvram.c            |  118 ---------

Should pic, iommu, and nvram really be in arch/powerpc/sysdev/

Also, since your renaming things any chance there is a better name  
for iic? (just wondering since its way to similar to what some people  
use for I2C).

>  arch/powerpc/platforms/cell/setup.c      |  138 +++++++++++
>  arch/ppc64/kernel/bpa_setup.c            |  140 -----------
>  arch/powerpc/platforms/cell/spider-pic.c |  190 +++++++++++++++
>  arch/ppc64/kernel/spider-pic.c           |  191 ---------------
>  arch/ppc64/Kconfig                       |   10
>  arch/ppc64/kernel/cpu_setup_power4.S     |    2
>  arch/ppc64/kernel/cputable.c             |    6
>  arch/ppc64/kernel/irq.c                  |    2
>  arch/ppc64/kernel/pSeries_smp.c          |    4
>  arch/ppc64/kernel/setup.c                |    8
>  arch/ppc64/kernel/traps.c                |    4
>  include/asm-ppc64/nvram.h                |    2
>  include/asm-ppc64/processor.h            |    7
>  25 files changed, 1248 insertions(+), 1245 deletions(-)