On Sep 11, 2007, at 8:57 AM, Scott Wood wrote: > On Tue, Sep 11, 2007 at 12:35:56AM -0500, Kumar Gala wrote: >> >> On Aug 28, 2007, at 3:16 PM, Scott Wood wrote: >> >>> 1. Fix get_immrbase() to use ranges, rather than reg. >>> >>> It is not always the case that the SoC's first reg property points >>> to the beginning of the entire SoC block. >> >> when is this true? > > The intent was to eliminate the need for the reg property in /soc. > >> Upon further testing this breaks some platforms. I don't think >> assuming the first range entry is mapping to the SOC register space >> is a good idea. > > Let me guess, 8544ds and 8548cds? Because of the same recent ranges > changes that we were arguing about in another thread? :-P
Yep. However, after some discussion with Segher on this for 83xx/ 85xx/86xx I think we want to keep the reg prop and have it cover the initial soc registers [size on 83xx is 0x100, size on 85xx/86xx would be 0x1000]. What we need is a saner way to determine immr on 82xx & 8xx. Segher's rule is that a given "reg" prop shouldn't overlap w/any other reg. We currently violate that on 8xx. Not as clear on 82xx if we do that. I'm thinking on 8xx we should move to grabbing a top level compat value (mpc8xx) and use the SPRN_IMMR to set immrbase. On mpc82xx-pq2 we could add a immr "device" to search for. - k _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
