From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from gate.crashing.org (gate.crashing.org [63.228.1.57]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0BACBDDE05 for ; Sun, 9 Dec 2007 18:07:24 +1100 (EST) Subject: Re: [PATCH 11/25] powerpc: 4xx PLB to PCI Express support From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt To: Stefan Roese In-Reply-To: <200712070802.01126.sr@denx.de> References: <20071206080120.B47DBDDF15@ozlabs.org> <200712061026.57215.sr@denx.de> <1196979686.6599.1.camel@pasglop> <200712070802.01126.sr@denx.de> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Sun, 09 Dec 2007 18:07:08 +1100 Message-Id: <1197184029.6572.19.camel@pasglop> Mime-Version: 1.0 Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org Reply-To: benh@kernel.crashing.org List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Fri, 2007-12-07 at 08:02 +0100, Stefan Roese wrote: > > > Ah... crap ! Do you think we should put that in the boot wrapper and > > fixup the device-tree or should we put it in the PCIe code proper ? > > How about this: We change the compatible node to "plb-pciex-440spe" > (without "A" and "B) and make a PVR runtime detection in the 4xx-pci > driver. > > What do you think? Should I prepare a patch for this? I suppose that's the best way though we should do the detection the other way around form the old code, that is detect rev A explicitely and consider everything else rev B (just in case some new rev ever appears..) Yes, I would appreciate a patch, thanks. Ben.