On Wed, 2010-05-05 at 11:11 -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 05, 2010 at 01:45:54PM -0700, Dave Kleikamp wrote:
> >+config ISS4xx
> >+ bool "ISS 4xx Simulator"
> >+ depends on (44x || 40x)
> >+ default n
> >+ select 405GP if 40x
> >+ select 440GP if 44x && !PPC_47x
> >+ select PPC_FPU
> >+ select OF_RTC
> >+ help
> >+ This option enables support for the IBM ISS simulation environment
>
> This looks like how we want to do this, however...
>
> >+/* We can have either UICs or MPICs */
> >+static void __init iss4xx_init_irq(void)
> >+{
> >+ struct device_node *np;
> >+
> >+ /* Find top level interrupt controller */
> >+ for_each_node_with_property(np, "interrupt-controller") {
> >+ if (of_get_property(np, "interrupts", NULL) == NULL)
> >+ break;
> >+ }
> >+ if (np == NULL)
> >+ panic("Can't find top level interrupt controller");
> >+
> >+ /* Check type and do appropriate initialization */
> >+ if (of_device_is_compatible(np, "ibm,uic")) {
> >+ uic_init_tree();
> >+ ppc_md.get_irq = uic_get_irq;
> >+ } else if (of_device_is_compatible(np, "chrp,open-pic")) {
> >+ /* The MPIC driver will get everything it needs from the
> >+ * device-tree, just pass 0 to all arguments
> >+ */
> >+ struct mpic *mpic = mpic_alloc(np, 0, MPIC_PRIMARY, 0, 0,
> >+ " MPIC ");
> >+ BUG_ON(mpic == NULL);
> >+ mpic_init(mpic);
> >+ ppc_md.get_irq = mpic_get_irq;
> >+ } else
> >+ panic("Unrecognized top level interrupt controller");
> >+}
>
> .. on non-476 builds we get link errors:
>
> arch/powerpc/platforms/built-in.o: In function `as1_writeb':
> (.init.text+0x5d4): undefined reference to `mpic_alloc'
> arch/powerpc/platforms/built-in.o: In function `as1_writeb':
> (.init.text+0x5e4): undefined reference to `mpic_init'
> arch/powerpc/platforms/built-in.o: In function `as1_writeb':
> (.init.text+0x5ea): undefined reference to `mpic_get_irq'
> arch/powerpc/platforms/built-in.o: In function `as1_writeb':
> (.init.text+0x5ee): undefined reference to `mpic_get_irq'
> make: *** [.tmp_vmlinux1] Error 1
>
> because we don't have CONFIG_MPIC turned on for these. I'd suggest we guard
> the mpic else chunk in this file behind CONFIG_MPIC. Agreed?
Yeah. That's reasonable.
> I'm less worried about the mpic references that are already guarded behind the
> CONFIG_SMP sections. Nobody has been crazy enough to make an SMP 440 or 460
> SoC
> yet, so CONFIG_SMP should only get selected for 476, and that already selects
> MPIC in the Kconfig.
>
> josh
--
Dave Kleikamp
IBM Linux Technology Center
_______________________________________________
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
