This is ppc. I'm in the midst of trying to get powerpc to boot, but our
boards are running an old version of ppcboot that can't be upgraded, so
I'm having to figure out the translation to the open firmware stuff.
By the way, this is an 860t, not c... typo.
Do you have any suggestions about gett
hi, all
I bought a SMC1500 stepper motor card. And it can connect with host
through parallel port. My target board is PowerPC 440, which hasn't
parrallel port. So I bought a PCI to Parallel line for SMC1500. But when I
run the stepper motor, I find it's not stable. I doubt there are somthing
w
On Fri, 23 Nov 2007 21:10:39 -0800
Greg KH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 23, 2007 at 05:24:31PM -0700, Grant Likely wrote:
> > From: Peter Korsgaard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> > Some multi-role (host/peripheral) USB controllers use a shared interrupt
> > line for all parts of the chip.
On 11/24/07, Alan Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, 23 Nov 2007 21:10:39 -0800
> Greg KH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Nov 23, 2007 at 05:24:31PM -0700, Grant Likely wrote:
> > > From: Peter Korsgaard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > >
> > > Some multi-role (host/peripheral) USB controller
On Saturday 24 November 2007, Alan Cox wrote:
> >
> > What about for platforms where irq 0 is a valid irq?
>
> There are no such platforms. Linus made that absolutely clear every time
> this came up before
>
> 0 - No IRQ
>
> A platform with a physical or bus IRQ of 0 needs t
Hi Vitaly,
>>> + printk(KERN_ERR "%s(): Not able to issue CPM command\n",
>>> + __FUNCTION__);
>>> + return -EIO;
>>>
>> Do these need to be protected with a spin lock?
>>
> Even that might be not enough - we may have simultaneous call of this func in
> non
On Friday 16 November 2007, Andrei Dolnikov wrote:
> +static int __init katanaqp_is_monarch(void)
> +{
> + return !(in_8((volatile char *)(cpld_base + KATANAQP_CPLD_PSR)) &
> + KATANAQP_CPLD_PSR_PMCM);
> +}
The pointer here needs to be __iomem, not volatile. Same in other places.
On Friday 23 November 2007, Grant Likely wrote:
>
> This patch series is based on the c67x00 work done by Peter Korsgaard and
> posted back in April this year.
What's changed since that version? Were the comments sent
at that time addressed?
___
Li
On Friday 23 November 2007, Grant Likely wrote:
> Some multi-role (host/peripheral) USB controllers use a shared interrupt
> line for all parts of the chip.
Like the musb_hdrc code ... soonish to go upstream (it needs some
updates to catch up to usbcore urb->status changes), this is used
by the No
This patch moves the CPM command handling into commproc.c
for CPM1 and cpm2_common.c. This is yet another preparation
to get rid of drivers accessing the CPM via the global cpmp.
Signed-off-by: Jochen Friedrich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
arch/powerpc/sysdev/commproc.c | 27 +++
On 11/24/07, David Brownell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Friday 23 November 2007, Grant Likely wrote:
> >
> > This patch series is based on the c67x00 work done by Peter Korsgaard and
> > posted back in April this year.
>
> What's changed since that version? Were the comments sent
> at that tim
On Saturday 24 November 2007, Jochen Friedrich wrote:
> This patch moves the CPM command handling into commproc.c
> for CPM1 and cpm2_common.c. This is yet another preparation
> to get rid of drivers accessing the CPM via the global cpmp.
good stuff, just a little nitpicking below:
> +DEFINE_SPIN
On 11/24/07, David Brownell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Friday 23 November 2007, Grant Likely wrote:
> > Some multi-role (host/peripheral) USB controllers use a shared interrupt
> > line for all parts of the chip.
>
> Like the musb_hdrc code ... soonish to go upstream (it needs some
> updates t
On Friday 23 November 2007, Grant Likely wrote:
> +/* These functions could also be implemented with SPI of HSS.
> + * This is currently not supported */
Give that this "HPI" interface seems to use a parallel bus
with irq-safe synchronous accesses, and SPI is a serial bus
where synchronous accesse
On Friday 23 November 2007, Grant Likely wrote:
> +config USB_C67X00_DRV
> + tristate "Cypress C67x00 support"
> + # only allowed to be =y if both USB!=m and USB_GADGET!=m
This is wrong. Remember that since this is a dual-role driver,
there are exactly three possible driver modes ...
This patch moves the CPM command handling into commproc.c
for CPM1 and cpm2_common.c. This is yet another preparation
to get rid of drivers accessing the CPM via the global cpmp.
Signed-off-by: Jochen Friedrich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
arch/powerpc/sysdev/commproc.c | 28 +++
On 11/24/07, David Brownell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Friday 23 November 2007, Grant Likely wrote:
> > +config USB_C67X00_DRV
> > +tristate "Cypress C67x00 support"
> > +# only allowed to be =y if both USB!=m and USB_GADGET!=m
>
> This is wrong. Remember that since this is a dual-role driver
On Friday 23 November 2007, Anton Vorontsov wrote:
> Here is the PATA Platform driver using OF infrastructure.
>
> Mostly it's just a wrapper around a bit modified pata_platform
> driver.
Thanks a lot for doing this. Patches 2/3 are what I tried to get
people to do for some time now but was too l
On Friday 23 November 2007, Anton Vorontsov wrote:
>
> +static struct of_device_id mpc834x_ids[] = {
> + { .compatible = "pata-platform", },
> + {},
> +};
> +
> +static int __init mpc834x_declare_of_platform_devices(void)
> +{
> + if (!machine_is(mpc834x_itx))
> + r
On Saturday 24 November 2007, Grant Likely wrote:
> On 11/24/07, David Brownell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Friday 23 November 2007, Grant Likely wrote:
> > > +config USB_C67X00_DRV
> > > +tristate "Cypress C67x00 support"
> > > +# only allowed to be =y if both USB!=m and USB_GADGET!=m
> >
>
On 11/24/07, David Brownell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Saturday 24 November 2007, Grant Likely wrote:
> > On 11/24/07, David Brownell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > On Friday 23 November 2007, Grant Likely wrote:
> > > > +config USB_C67X00_DRV
> > > > +tristate "Cypress C67x00 support"
> > >
On Sat, 24 Nov 2007 18:53:34 +0100
Jochen Friedrich wrote:
> Hi Vitaly,
>
> >>> + printk(KERN_ERR "%s(): Not able to issue CPM command\n",
> >>> + __FUNCTION__);
> >>> + return -EIO;
> >>>
> >> Do these need to be protected with a spin lock?
> >>
> > Even t
thanks, applied.
___
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org
https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
On Sat, 2007-11-24 at 19:51 +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>
> This should be done automatically using of_platform_bus_probe().
Not necessarily. of_platform_bus_probe() is an optional facility that is
common used by SoCs that have lots of otherwise non-probable on chip
devices, but for platforms wi
Following up from initial conversation with benh in #ppc64, I did a bit
of testing (and then a bit more).
Two PCIe cards for my testing:
a) sata_sil24 eSATA (x86 BIOS)
b) ATI X700 graphics (x86 BIOS)
I put the card into an amd64 box, found the relevant 'rom' node ($ROM) under
/sys/device/pci*, an
On 11/24/07, Robin H. Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Following up from initial conversation with benh in #ppc64, I did a bit
> of testing (and then a bit more).
>
> Two PCIe cards for my testing:
> a) sata_sil24 eSATA (x86 BIOS)
> b) ATI X700 graphics (x86 BIOS)
>
> I put the card into an amd
hi, all
I bought a SMC1500 stepper motor card. And it can connect with host
through parallel port. My target board is PowerPC 440, which hasn't
parrallel port. So I bought a PCI to Parallel line for SMC1500. But when I
run the stepper motor, I find it's not stable. I doubt there are somthing
w
Here's what I've gotten so far:
Hard_Ethernet_MAC: [EMAIL PROTECTED] {
#address-cells = <1>;
#size-cells = <1>;
[EMAIL PROTECTED] {
compatible = "xlnx,xps-ll-temac-1.00.a",
"xl
28 matches
Mail list logo
