On Thu, Sep 06, 2007 at 04:30:23PM -0500, Scott Wood wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 06, 2007 at 10:57:28PM +0200, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> > >>>BTW, IEEE1275 seems to disagree:
> > >>
> > >>No it doesn't.
> > >
> > >"...in conventional usage the string begins with the name of the
> > >device's
> > >manuf
On Thu, Sep 06, 2007 at 10:57:28PM +0200, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> >>>BTW, IEEE1275 seems to disagree:
> >>
> >>No it doesn't.
> >
> >"...in conventional usage the string begins with the name of the
> >device's
> >manufacturer".
>
> You cut that sentence short here, it continues: "as with the
>>> BTW, IEEE1275 seems to disagree:
>>
>> No it doesn't.
>
> "...in conventional usage the string begins with the name of the
> device's
> manufacturer".
You cut that sentence short here, it continues: "as with the name
property."
> Even if you want to quibble about the manner in which the
> ma
On Thu, Sep 06, 2007 at 09:36:07PM +0200, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> >BTW, IEEE1275 seems to disagree:
>
> No it doesn't.
"...in conventional usage the string begins with the name of the device's
manufacturer". Even if you want to quibble about the manner in which the
manufacturer is specified,
> BTW, IEEE1275 seems to disagree:
No it doesn't.
> A manufacturer-dependent string that generally specifies the model
> name
> and number (including revision level) for this device. The format of
> the text string is arbitrary, although in conventional usage the
> string
> begins with
>>> + model = "Analogue & Micro Adder MPC875";
>>
>> This should probably be just "MPC875".
>
> There's more than one board with an MPC875 on it.
"model" is the model name the vendor uses. It isn't supposed to
be unique globally, nor does it say what CPU is
On Thu, Sep 06, 2007 at 02:12:55PM -0500, Scott Wood wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 06, 2007 at 08:48:12PM +0200, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> > So it should be "Adder MPC875", then :-)
>
> Any particular reason to leave out potentially useful information in a
> field that is for human consumption?
>
> Othe
On Thu, Sep 06, 2007 at 08:48:12PM +0200, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> >+model = "Analogue & Micro Adder MPC875";
>
> This should probably be just "MPC875".
> >>>
> >>>There's more than one board with an MPC875 on it.
> >>
> >>"model" is the model name the vendor uses. It isn't
> + model = "Analogue & Micro Adder MPC875";
This should probably be just "MPC875".
>>>
>>> There's more than one board with an MPC875 on it.
>>
>> "model" is the model name the vendor uses. It isn't supposed to
>> be unique globally, nor does it say what CPU is on the board.
>
> The
On Thu, Sep 06, 2007 at 07:50:32PM +0200, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> >>>+ model = "Analogue & Micro Adder MPC875";
> >>
> >>This should probably be just "MPC875".
> >
> >There's more than one board with an MPC875 on it.
>
> "model" is the model name the vendor uses. It isn't supposed to
> be un
>>> + model = "Analogue & Micro Adder MPC875";
>>
>> This should probably be just "MPC875".
>
> There's more than one board with an MPC875 on it.
"model" is the model name the vendor uses. It isn't supposed to
be unique globally, nor does it say what CPU is on the board.
Segher
_
On Thu, Sep 06, 2007 at 04:08:43PM +0200, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> >+/ {
> >+model = "Analogue & Micro Adder MPC875";
>
> This should probably be just "MPC875".
There's more than one board with an MPC875 on it.
-Scott
___
Linuxppc-dev mailing li
> +/ {
> + model = "Analogue & Micro Adder MPC875";
This should probably be just "MPC875".
Segher
___
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org
https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
13 matches
Mail list logo
