On Tue, 15 Jan 2008 12:38:09 -0600 Olof Johansson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 15, 2008 at 12:25:26PM -0600, Scott Wood wrote: > > Olof Johansson wrote: > > > On Tue, Jan 15, 2008 at 12:19:24PM -0600, Scott Wood wrote: > > >> On Tue, Jan 15, 2008 at 08:09:15AM +0100, Stefan Roese wrote: > > >>> This patch adds the 405EXr to the powerpc cuptable. Basically the 405EXr > > >>> is a 405EX with only one EMAC and only one PCIe interface. > > >> Sounds like they have the same core... why do they need separate cputable > > >> entries? > > > > > > AMCC has always indicated SoC products by new PVRs. This isn't news, > > > even though it isn't exactly a clean solution. :) > > > > But the old 405EX entry would have matched both chips. Why add a new > > significant bit to pvr_mask? For the name in /proc/cpuinfo? > > Presumably, yes. > > Again, this is nothing new. Other 405/440 products are doing the same > thing. Does anyone have an actual problem with this patch? I'm inclined to take it as it doesn't really cause any problems and may eventually be needed anyway if there is a chip errata or something. josh _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
