From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
To: Olof Johansson <olof@lixom.net>
Cc: linuxppc-dev list <linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>,
Linux Kernel list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] powerpc: Kill machine numbers
Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2006 19:01:38 +1100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1143187298.3710.3.camel@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20060324062624.GA16815@pb15.lixom.net>
> It would be very useful to print the ppc_md.name of the found machine
> here, even without debugging enabled.
Not sure ... without debugging enabled, it's likely that you won't see
anything that early anyway :)
> > -struct machdep_calls __initdata cell_md = {
> > +define_machine(cell) {
> > .probe = cell_probe,
> > .setup_arch = cell_setup_arch,
> > .init_early = cell_init_early,
>
> You forgot to add a .name value here.
Yup, thanks. I think this should become cpb instead of cell, other cell
based boards would then have different ppc_md's though they could share
various routines.
> > Index: linux-work/arch/powerpc/kernel/prom_init.c
> > ===================================================================
> > --- linux-work.orig/arch/powerpc/kernel/prom_init.c 2006-03-10 15:58:17.000000000 +1100
> > +++ linux-work/arch/powerpc/kernel/prom_init.c 2006-03-24 14:41:14.000000000 +1100
> [...]
> > + /* If not a mac, try to figure out if it's an IBM pSeries. We assume
> > + * it is if :
> > + * - /device_type is "chrp" (please, do NOT use that for future
> > + * non-IBM designs !
> > + * - it has /rtas
> > + */
>
> It's really weird that IBM chose to use "chrp" to describe a
> PAPR-compliant platform. I guess it's for historical reasons, but it
> sure isn't CHRP any more.
Yup, I'm trying to get that changed in the architecture but even if I'm
successful, we'll have to deal with existing machines.
> Also, please change the wording. With power.org, there will likely be
> non-IBM PAPR-compliant platforms at some point. "non-PAPR-compliant
> designs" is a better term to use.
Ok.
> > Index: linux-work/Documentation/powerpc/booting-without-of.txt
> > ===================================================================
> > --- linux-work.orig/Documentation/powerpc/booting-without-of.txt 2006-03-24 11:42:13.000000000 +1100
> > +++ linux-work/Documentation/powerpc/booting-without-of.txt 2006-03-24 14:28:27.000000000 +1100
> > @@ -719,6 +719,10 @@ address which can extend beyond that lim
> > - model : this is your board name/model
> > - #address-cells : address representation for "root" devices
> > - #size-cells: the size representation for "root" devices
> > + - device_type : This property shouldn't be necessary. However, if
> > + device to create a device_type for your root node, make sure it
>
> if you device to create... ?
I was tired :) If you "decide" to create.. will fix, thanks.
> > + is _not_ "chrp" as this will be matched by the kernel to be a
> > + CHRP machine on 32 bits kernel or a pSeries on 64 bits kernels
>
> ...or a PAPR-compliant machine on 64-bit kernels.
>
> (Also, "xx-bit kernels", not "xx bits kernels").
yeah yeah :) Thanks for the review anyway !
Cheers,
Ben.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
To: Olof Johansson <olof@lixom.net>
Cc: Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>,
linuxppc-dev list <linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org>,
Linux Kernel list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] powerpc: Kill machine numbers
Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2006 19:01:38 +1100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1143187298.3710.3.camel@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20060324062624.GA16815@pb15.lixom.net>
> It would be very useful to print the ppc_md.name of the found machine
> here, even without debugging enabled.
Not sure ... without debugging enabled, it's likely that you won't see
anything that early anyway :)
> > -struct machdep_calls __initdata cell_md = {
> > +define_machine(cell) {
> > .probe = cell_probe,
> > .setup_arch = cell_setup_arch,
> > .init_early = cell_init_early,
>
> You forgot to add a .name value here.
Yup, thanks. I think this should become cpb instead of cell, other cell
based boards would then have different ppc_md's though they could share
various routines.
> > Index: linux-work/arch/powerpc/kernel/prom_init.c
> > ===================================================================
> > --- linux-work.orig/arch/powerpc/kernel/prom_init.c 2006-03-10 15:58:17.000000000 +1100
> > +++ linux-work/arch/powerpc/kernel/prom_init.c 2006-03-24 14:41:14.000000000 +1100
> [...]
> > + /* If not a mac, try to figure out if it's an IBM pSeries. We assume
> > + * it is if :
> > + * - /device_type is "chrp" (please, do NOT use that for future
> > + * non-IBM designs !
> > + * - it has /rtas
> > + */
>
> It's really weird that IBM chose to use "chrp" to describe a
> PAPR-compliant platform. I guess it's for historical reasons, but it
> sure isn't CHRP any more.
Yup, I'm trying to get that changed in the architecture but even if I'm
successful, we'll have to deal with existing machines.
> Also, please change the wording. With power.org, there will likely be
> non-IBM PAPR-compliant platforms at some point. "non-PAPR-compliant
> designs" is a better term to use.
Ok.
> > Index: linux-work/Documentation/powerpc/booting-without-of.txt
> > ===================================================================
> > --- linux-work.orig/Documentation/powerpc/booting-without-of.txt 2006-03-24 11:42:13.000000000 +1100
> > +++ linux-work/Documentation/powerpc/booting-without-of.txt 2006-03-24 14:28:27.000000000 +1100
> > @@ -719,6 +719,10 @@ address which can extend beyond that lim
> > - model : this is your board name/model
> > - #address-cells : address representation for "root" devices
> > - #size-cells: the size representation for "root" devices
> > + - device_type : This property shouldn't be necessary. However, if
> > + device to create a device_type for your root node, make sure it
>
> if you device to create... ?
I was tired :) If you "decide" to create.. will fix, thanks.
> > + is _not_ "chrp" as this will be matched by the kernel to be a
> > + CHRP machine on 32 bits kernel or a pSeries on 64 bits kernels
>
> ...or a PAPR-compliant machine on 64-bit kernels.
>
> (Also, "xx-bit kernels", not "xx bits kernels").
yeah yeah :) Thanks for the review anyway !
Cheers,
Ben.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-03-24 8:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-03-24 5:42 [PATCH] powerpc: Kill machine numbers Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2006-03-24 6:26 ` Olof Johansson
2006-03-24 6:26 ` Olof Johansson
2006-03-24 8:01 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt [this message]
2006-03-24 8:01 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2006-03-24 8:46 ` Arnd Bergmann
2006-03-24 8:46 ` Arnd Bergmann
2006-03-24 12:23 ` Segher Boessenkool
2006-03-24 18:52 ` [PATCH] powerpc: fix cell platform detection Arnd Bergmann
2006-03-24 18:58 ` [PATCH] powerpc: Kill machine numbers Olof Johansson
2006-03-24 18:58 ` Olof Johansson
2006-03-24 9:27 ` Arnd Bergmann
2006-03-24 9:27 ` Arnd Bergmann
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1143187298.3710.3.camel@localhost.localdomain \
--to=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org \
--cc=olof@lixom.net \
--cc=paulus@samba.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.