On Dec 20, 2010, at 10:49 AM, Peter Tyser wrote:
> Thanks for the cleanup. What branch should this series be applied to?
> And are there prerequisites? I'm having issues applying them to test
> and review.
>
> On Fri, 2010-12-17 at 17:50 -0600, Kumar Gala wrote:
>> Remove duplicated code in MPC8572 DS board and utliize the common
>> fsl_pcie_init_board().
>
> Looks like a copy/paste from the MPC8572.
>
> On all the patches in the series s/utliize/utilize/.
>
> <snip>
Will fix, oops ;)
>
>> --- a/board/xes/common/fsl_8xxx_pci.c
>> +++ b/board/xes/common/fsl_8xxx_pci.c
>> @@ -34,15 +34,6 @@
>> #ifdef CONFIG_PCI1
>> static struct pci_controller pci1_hose;
>> #endif
>
> Is there a reason PCI1 wasn't changed over too? I see pci1_hose is
> still referenced below, but other boards with a PCI1 don't use similar
> code.
I was trying to limit how much clean up I did so left this to just PCIe
interfaces. Normal PCI and PCI-X is something I might get around to but one
thing at a time
>
>> -#ifdef CONFIG_PCIE1
>> -static struct pci_controller pcie1_hose;
>> -#endif
>> -#ifdef CONFIG_PCIE2
>> -static struct pci_controller pcie2_hose;
>> -#endif
>> -#ifdef CONFIG_PCIE3
>> -static struct pci_controller pcie3_hose;
>> -#endif
>
> <snip>
>
>> diff --git a/board/xes/xpedite520x/law.c b/board/xes/xpedite520x/law.c
>> index bbfcb9d..3afb3ae 100644
>> --- a/board/xes/xpedite520x/law.c
>> +++ b/board/xes/xpedite520x/law.c
>> @@ -38,10 +38,6 @@ struct law_entry law_table[] = {
>> /* LBC window - maps 256M 0xf0000000 -> 0xffffffff */
>> SET_LAW(CONFIG_SYS_FLASH_BASE2, LAW_SIZE_256M, LAW_TRGT_IF_LBC),
>> SET_LAW(CONFIG_SYS_NAND_BASE, LAW_SIZE_1M, LAW_TRGT_IF_LBC),
>> -#if CONFIG_SYS_PCI1_MEM_PHYS
>> - SET_LAW(CONFIG_SYS_PCI1_MEM_PHYS, LAW_SIZE_1G, LAW_TRGT_IF_PCI_1),
>> - SET_LAW(CONFIG_SYS_PCI1_IO_PHYS, LAW_SIZE_8M, LAW_TRGT_IF_PCI_1),
>> -#endif
>> #if CONFIG_SYS_PCI2_MEM_PHYS
>> SET_LAW(CONFIG_SYS_PCI2_MEM_PHYS, LAW_SIZE_256M, LAW_TRGT_IF_PCI_2),
>> SET_LAW(CONFIG_SYS_PCI2_IO_PHYS, LAW_SIZE_8M, LAW_TRGT_IF_PCI_2),
>
> The PCI2 law can be removed too. Its not currently used on any boards
> supported by mainline U-Boot.
Ok, will remove in updated patch
- k
_______________________________________________
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
