Am 30.08.2013 15:21, schrieb Alexander Graf: > > On 16.08.2013, at 00:35, Andreas Färber wrote: > >> Instead of relying on cpu_model, obtain the device tree node label >> per CPU. Use DeviceClass::fw_name when available. This implicitly >> resolves HOST@0 node labels for those CPUs through inheritance. >> >> Whenever DeviceClass::fw_name is not available, derive it from the CPU's >> type name and fill it in for that class with a "PowerPC," prefix for >> PAPR compliance. > > Could we just mandate the fw_name field to always be set for all classes > instead?
Sure, we can assert it. But we would then need to set fw_name for the various 970 families at least, which I have been using with pseries in the past. Cell and POWER6 are TODO so I'm not concerned about them. Not sure about RS64 that Alexey mentioned - I wouldn't be able to test. Would be bad to regress and abort with CPU models that were working okay before. Andreas -- SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany GF: Jeff Hawn, Jennifer Guild, Felix Imendörffer; HRB 16746 AG Nürnberg
