On Tue, 2012-07-10 at 06:48 -0500, Kumar Gala wrote: > On Jul 10, 2012, at 3:39 AM, Xu Jiucheng wrote: > > --- > > arch/powerpc/boot/dts/p1021rdb-pc.dtsi | 236 > > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > arch/powerpc/boot/dts/p1021rdb-pc_32b.dts | 96 ++++++++++++ > > arch/powerpc/boot/dts/p1021rdb-pc_36b.dts | 96 ++++++++++++ > > arch/powerpc/boot/dts/p1021rdb.dts | 96 ------------ > > arch/powerpc/boot/dts/p1021rdb.dtsi | 236 > > ----------------------------- > > arch/powerpc/boot/dts/p1021rdb_36b.dts | 96 ------------ > > 6 files changed, 428 insertions(+), 428 deletions(-) > > create mode 100644 arch/powerpc/boot/dts/p1021rdb-pc.dtsi > > create mode 100644 arch/powerpc/boot/dts/p1021rdb-pc_32b.dts > > create mode 100644 arch/powerpc/boot/dts/p1021rdb-pc_36b.dts > > delete mode 100644 arch/powerpc/boot/dts/p1021rdb.dts > > delete mode 100644 arch/powerpc/boot/dts/p1021rdb.dtsi > > delete mode 100644 arch/powerpc/boot/dts/p1021rdb_36b.dts > > Do we really need a 32 & 36 bit device tree for this board? Isnt the memory > fixed so why not just have 32b? > I have no idea, 36 bit is already there in the history release of SDK, If it is not necessary for upstream, I can resend a new patch without 36 bit. > Also, why are you removing the dts for the older P1021RDB?? > > - k This dts for the older P1021RDB was committed by me. I just rename these files in order to keep uniformity with other platforms, e.g "P1020rdb-pc.dtsi p1020mbg-pc.dtsi". If you think it doesn't matter, please ignore this patch.
If AMP is a specific application as Timur says, please ignore the AMP patch. Thanks, Jiucheng _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
