Marian Balakowicz wrote:
> Scott Wood wrote:
>>> +void tqm5200_show_cpuinfo(struct seq_file *m)
>>> +{
>>> + struct device_node* np = of_find_all_nodes(NULL);
>>> + const char *model = NULL;
>>> +
>>> + if (np)
>>> + model = of_get_property(np, "model", NULL);
>>> +
>>> + seq_prin
Scott Wood wrote:
>
>> +void tqm5200_show_cpuinfo(struct seq_file *m)
>> +{
>> +struct device_node* np = of_find_all_nodes(NULL);
>> +const char *model = NULL;
>> +
>> +if (np)
>> +model = of_get_property(np, "model", NULL);
>> +
>> +seq_printf(m, "vendor\t\t: Free
Grant Likely wrote:
> Both this patch and the CM5200 support patch (#6 in your series) are
> pretty much clones of lite5200.c. I don't think this is the right
> approach. Don't duplicate code in this way. Determine the common
> bits and put them in a common place to be usable by any 5200 board
>
On 10/8/07, Wolfgang Denk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
> >
> > > > Why don't we fix it in U-Boot, then, and get rid of this in Linux?
> > >
> > > Mostly because I haven't gotten to it yet. :-/
> >
> > Actually, it's more than that. I don't want to force u
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
>
> > > Why don't we fix it in U-Boot, then, and get rid of this in Linux?
> >
> > Mostly because I haven't gotten to it yet. :-/
>
> Actually, it's more than that. I don't want to force users to upgrade
> their firmware on the lite5200. Linux boots on
On 10/8/07, Grant Likely <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 10/8/07, Wolfgang Denk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
> > > Lite5200 touches it because firmware does *not* do the right thing at
> > > the moment.
> >
> > Why don't we fix it in U-Boot, then, and get
On Sun, Oct 07, 2007 at 01:19:54PM +0200, Marian Balakowicz wrote:
> + np = of_find_node_by_type(NULL, "cpu");
> + if (np) {
> + unsigned int *fp =
> + (int *)of_get_property(np, "clock-frequency", NULL);
> + if (fp != 0)
> + loops
On 10/8/07, Wolfgang Denk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
> >
> > > + port_config &= ~0x0300; /* ATA CS is on csb_4/5 */
> > > + port_config |= 0x0100;
> >
> > Are you *sure* you want this? You should only be touching port_con
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
>
> > + port_config &= ~0x0300; /* ATA CS is on csb_4/5 */
> > + port_config |= 0x0100;
>
> Are you *sure* you want this? You should only be touching port_config
> if firmware fails to set it up correctly. Don't blindly c
On 10/7/07, Marian Balakowicz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Add arch/powerpc board support for TQM5200.
>
> Signed-off-by: Marian Balakowicz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Signed-off-by: Jan Wrobel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Hmmm
Both this patch and the CM5200 support patch (#6 in your series) are
pretty mu
On Sun, 07 Oct 2007 13:19:54 +0200 Marian Balakowicz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/platforms/52xx/tqm5200.c
>
> +#include
You need this for the flattened device tree stuff, so good. However ...
> +#include
You should not include this file. And you actually don't use any of
Add arch/powerpc board support for TQM5200.
Signed-off-by: Marian Balakowicz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Signed-off-by: Jan Wrobel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
Kconfig |5 +
Makefile |1
tqm5200.c | 174 ++
3 files changed, 180 inserti
12 matches
Mail list logo
