On Tue, Aug 07, 2007 at 08:10:38AM -0500, Josh Boyer wrote:
> On Tue, 7 Aug 2007 13:05:47 +1000
> David Gibson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > > Rather than just removing these defines and using hardcoded values,
> > > > I'd prefer to see separate SPRN_DBCR0_40X and SPRN_DBCR0_44X defines.
> > >
> > > Ok. And place them where? In the same file since they aren't DCR
> > > defines?
> > > Seems fairly trivial, but ok.
> >
> > Just where the old 44x specific define was. And yes, it is fairly
> > trivial.
>
> Fixed.
>
> > > > [snip]
> > > > > +#define EMAC_RESET 0x20000000
> > > > > +#define MAL_RESET 0x80000000
> > > >
> > > > I think the MAL_RESET definition should go in the same place as the
> > > > DCR number definition.
> > >
> > > Ok. Trivial.
> >
> > Yes.
>
> Fixed.
>
> > > > As I think I said before, I'm not really happy with this being
> > > > hardcoded assuming exactly 2 ethernets.
> > >
> > > Well, it's hardcoded to assume one or two. I know of only one board that
> > > has
> > > more than two EMACs. I was hoping we could get this in for 2.6.24 as-is
> > > and
> > > change it when needs be. But I'll look at making it var-args or similar.
>
> I'm going to hold off on this for now. I'm not disagreeing with you,
> but there are no upcoming board ports that have more than two EMACs so
> I'd like to focus on getting Bamboo (440EP) and Sequoia (440EPx)
> in-tree first. Perhaps even Walnut, if there's time.
Fair enough.
--
David Gibson | I'll have my music baroque, and my code
david AT gibson.dropbear.id.au | minimalist, thank you. NOT _the_ _other_
| _way_ _around_!
http://www.ozlabs.org/~dgibson
_______________________________________________
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org
https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
