On Wed, Aug 13, 2008 at 10:06 AM, John Rigby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Thu, Aug 07, 2008 at 11:36:25AM -0600, John Rigby wrote:
>> Can you use something like 'fsl,primary-pci-bridge' instead? 'primary'
>> is a little too generic for my taste. Also, the purpose of identifying
>> one of the PCI bridges as primary should be documented (This is me
>> pushing against encoding Linux internal implementation details into the
>> device tree, I suspect that 'primary' doesn't belong in the device tree
>> at all).
>>
>
> Ok, I got the primary idea from sam440ep.dts, I'm willing to do something
> different.
>
> I have thought about adding an is_primary argument to mpc83xx_add_bridge
> like fsl_add_bridge has and make the callers figure out which is primary.
>
> The simple case is the platform that have only one bus:
> for_each_compatible_node(np, "pci", "fsl,mpc8540-pci")
> fsl_add_bridge(np, 1);
>
> Callers with multiple bridges do something like this:
> for_each_compatible_node(np, "pci", "fsl,mpc8641-pcie") {
> struct resource rsrc;
> of_address_to_resource(np, 0, &rsrc);
> if ((rsrc.start & 0xfffff) == 0x8000)
> fsl_add_bridge(np, 1);
> else
> fsl_add_bridge(np, 0);
> }
>
> So now we are using hardcoded offsets again.
Go with the hardcoded offset. Linux is broken, so the workaround
should be in Linux code until Linux PCI code is fixed.
g.
--
Grant Likely, B.Sc., P.Eng.
Secret Lab Technologies Ltd.
_______________________________________________
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org
https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
