From: Adrian Cox <adrian@humboldt.co.uk>
To: "Mark A. Greer" <mgreer@mvista.com>
Cc: linuxppc-embedded@lists.linuxppc.org
Subject: Re: Internal interrupts on the MPC107
Date: 02 Jun 2003 12:46:37 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1054554408.20568.86.camel@newt> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3ED7EFB4.2050400@mvista.com>
On Sat, 2003-05-31 at 00:56, Mark A. Greer wrote:
> [snip]
> My guess is
> that your board's fw (or early kernel init code) is setting it up with
> the correct value but on the other systems you mentioned, the fw doesn't
> (and the reset value of 0x00 is returned). Basically, if I'm
> interpreting the manual correctly, you probably need to do something
> other than count on the fw setting up that field in that reg correctly.
For boards derived from the linuxppc_2_4_devel tree, everything works.
I've now done kernel ports for several MPC107 based boards, all derived
from that tree, which use the "new way" you describe below.
> [description of "old way" snipped]
I think I may force the driver to run in polled mode on kernels which
use the "old way". Many of them fail to initialise the vector in the
EPIC.
> The "new way" of initializing the openpic uses the openpic_set_sources()
> routine which allows you to select just the vectors you want to
> initialize and assign them the IRQ values that you want (independent of
> their offset). Much nicer and it doesn't write to vectors/locations
> that you don't want written.
>
> The problem for an I2C driver is that the IRQ is now board specific.
>
> So what to do? Well, the board-specific file needs to initialize the
> I2C vector. Also, there has to be some mechanism for the board-specific
> file to tell your driver what the IRQ is. Maybe the best solution is to
> have the board-specific code set up the vector field in the IIVPR0 reg
> with the proper IRQ and then your driver won't need to change. Seems
> fairly clean but you'll have to hack the board-specific code of any
> boards that will use the I2C driver.
If there's any interest I could tidy up the driver and submit it into
linuxppc_2_4_devel along with a patch that collects MPC107 configuration
into one place.
- Adrian Cox
http://www.humboldt.co.uk/
** Sent via the linuxppc-embedded mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-06-02 11:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-05-28 10:49 Internal interrupts on the MPC107 Adrian Cox
2003-05-30 23:56 ` Mark A. Greer
2003-06-02 11:46 ` Adrian Cox [this message]
2003-06-02 18:55 ` Tom Rini
2003-06-03 0:07 ` bdiGDB configuration file for PPC750 and MPC107 bridge chip dong in kang
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=1054554408.20568.86.camel@newt \
--to=adrian@humboldt.co.uk \
--cc=linuxppc-embedded@lists.linuxppc.org \
--cc=mgreer@mvista.com \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).