From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <vbarshak@ru.mvista.com>
Received: from buildserver.ru.mvista.com (unknown [85.21.88.6])
	by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C674DDFD8
	for <linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org>; Fri, 21 Sep 2007 04:56:57 +1000 (EST)
Message-ID: <46F2C23A.40001@ru.mvista.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2007 22:55:54 +0400
From: Valentine Barshak <vbarshak@ru.mvista.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Josh Boyer <jwboyer@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] PowerPC: Fix Sequoia MAL0 and EMAC dts entries.
References: <20070918172510.GA30944@ru.mvista.com>	<20070918172913.GA31098@ru.mvista.com>	<20070919010526.GA23646@localhost.localdomain>	<46F10478.1080506@ru.mvista.com>	<46F2BFFA.1060203@ru.mvista.com>
	<20070920135153.588cfd61@weaponx.rchland.ibm.com>
In-Reply-To: <20070920135153.588cfd61@weaponx.rchland.ibm.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, David Gibson <david@gibson.dropbear.id.au>
List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List <linuxppc-dev.ozlabs.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev>,
	<mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@ozlabs.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://ozlabs.org/pipermail/linuxppc-dev>
List-Post: <mailto:linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org>
List-Help: <mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@ozlabs.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev>,
	<mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@ozlabs.org?subject=subscribe>

Josh Boyer wrote:
> On Thu, 20 Sep 2007 22:46:18 +0400
> Valentine Barshak <vbarshak@ru.mvista.com> wrote:
> 
>> Valentine Barshak wrote:
>>> David Gibson wrote:
>>>> On Tue, Sep 18, 2007 at 09:29:13PM +0400, Valentine Barshak wrote:
>>>>> According to PowerPC 440EPx documentation,
>>>>> MAL0 is comprised of four channels (two transmit and two receive).
>>>>> Each channel is dedicated to one of two EMAC cores.
>>>>> This patch fixes Sequoia DTS MAL0 entry and EMAC entries,
>>>>> assigning correct channel numbers to EMACs.
>>>> Hrm.. did they change the EMAC in 440EPx to only use one MAL
>>>> tx-channel?  All the older ones could use two (for no readily apparent
>>>> reason, IMO).
>>>>
>>> Yes, they did.
>>> Just 1 tx and 1 rx-channel per EMAC. Just 2 bits to select channels, 
>>> while all other bits in MAL registers are reserved.
>>> I'm not sure why they did it (possible bus bandwidth problems), but it's 
>>> impossible to set more than 1 rx/tx channel for each EMAC in 440EPx.
>> Josh, David, is this patch OK?
> 
> Yeah.  I applied it to my tree and asked Paul to pull.  Same for the
> Bamboo one.
> 
> josh
OK thanks :)