PPC vs POWERPC

PPC vs POWERPC

[samppa]

Hi,
I want to port a board ( WRS SBC8265 ) from the PPC branch to the POWERPC
branch in the Linux Kernel -- do you have any good starting points that
describes what I need to pay attention to?

I've already made a port of U-boot-1.3.1 and enabled CONFIG_OF_LIBFDT.

So I need to create a DTS file, compile it with the DTC compiler and port
the current PPC branch to the POWERPC branch to my understanding.


Cheers // Matias

Re: PPC vs POWERPC

[Grant Likely]

On 1/11/08, samppa@sundmangroup.com <samppa@sundmangroup.com> wrote:
> Hi,
> I want to port a board ( WRS SBC8265 ) from the PPC branch to the POWERPC
> branch in the Linux Kernel -- do you have any good starting points that
> describes what I need to pay attention to?
>
> I've already made a port of U-boot-1.3.1 and enabled CONFIG_OF_LIBFDT.
>
> So I need to create a DTS file, compile it with the DTC compiler and port
> the current PPC branch to the POWERPC branch to my understanding.

Yes, you're exactly right.  Use one of the dts files in
arch/powerpc/boot/dts as a starting point and read
Documentation/powerpc/booting-without-of.txt to find out what is
expected in the device tree.

Cheers,
g.

-- 
Grant Likely, B.Sc., P.Eng.
Secret Lab Technologies Ltd.

Re: PPC vs POWERPC

[Matias Sundman]

 >>Documentation/powerpc/booting-without-of.txt to find out what is
 >>expected in the device tree.

Is there any more information on how the "of_*" ( e.g. of_node_put ,  
of_find_node_by_type ) functions should be implemented in  the 
"arch/powerpc/platforms/myplatform/myboard_setup.c" file
or is the documentation the existing "*.c" c files under 
arch/powerpc/platforms ?

Since I have a 82xx board I assume that "myboard_setup.c" file shall be 
put under arch/powerpc/platforms/82xx.

Cheers // Matias


Grant Likely skrev:
> On 1/11/08, samppa@sundmangroup.com <samppa@sundmangroup.com> wrote:
>   
>> Hi,
>> I want to port a board ( WRS SBC8265 ) from the PPC branch to the POWERPC
>> branch in the Linux Kernel -- do you have any good starting points that
>> describes what I need to pay attention to?
>>
>> I've already made a port of U-boot-1.3.1 and enabled CONFIG_OF_LIBFDT.
>>
>> So I need to create a DTS file, compile it with the DTC compiler and port
>> the current PPC branch to the POWERPC branch to my understanding.
>>     
>
> Yes, you're exactly right.  Use one of the dts files in
> arch/powerpc/boot/dts as a starting point and read
> Documentation/powerpc/booting-without-of.txt to find out what is
> expected in the device tree.
>
> Cheers,
> g.
>
>   

Re: PPC vs POWERPC

[Jon Loeliger]

On Tue, 2008-01-15 at 04:38, Matias Sundman wrote:
>  >>Documentation/powerpc/booting-without-of.txt to find out what is
>  >>expected in the device tree.
> 
> Is there any more information on how the "of_*" ( e.g. of_node_put ,  
> of_find_node_by_type ) functions should be implemented in  the 
> "arch/powerpc/platforms/myplatform/myboard_setup.c" file
> or is the documentation the existing "*.c" c files under 
> arch/powerpc/platforms ?
> 
> Since I have a 82xx board I assume that "myboard_setup.c" file shall be 
> put under arch/powerpc/platforms/82xx.

Maybe.  Which 82xx is it?  There is a notable difference
between, say, the 824x boards and the 827x boards.  If it
is the latter, perhaps the existing 82xx/ pq2 or mpc8272
parts are already sufficient?

If it is the former group, 824x, perhaps some of the parts
in embedded6xx/ are usable?  Also note that I am working on
publishing an 824x StorCenter port under embedded6xx/ at
this time as well.  First patches were posted to linuxppc-dev
list at ozlabs.org.

HTH,
jdl

Re: PPC vs POWERPC

[Scott Wood]

On Tue, Jan 15, 2008 at 11:01:33AM -0600, Jon Loeliger wrote:
> If it is the former group, 824x, perhaps some of the parts
> in embedded6xx/ are usable?  

Not all 824x fall into that category; for example, 8248 is pq2.  Someone
in marketing should be shot.

-Scott

Re: PPC vs POWERPC

[Jon Loeliger]

On Tue, 2008-01-15 at 11:07, Scott Wood wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 15, 2008 at 11:01:33AM -0600, Jon Loeliger wrote:
> > If it is the former group, 824x, perhaps some of the parts
> > in embedded6xx/ are usable?  
> 
> Not all 824x fall into that category; for example, 8248 is pq2.

Gah.  Of course.

>   Someone in marketing should be shot.

Photos, bullets or heroin? :-)

jdl

Re: PPC vs POWERPC

[Matias Sundman]

Jon Loeliger skrev:
> On Tue, 2008-01-15 at 04:38, Matias Sundman wrote:
>   
>>  >>Documentation/powerpc/booting-without-of.txt to find out what is
>>  >>expected in the device tree.
>>
>> Is there any more information on how the "of_*" ( e.g. of_node_put ,  
>> of_find_node_by_type ) functions should be implemented in  the 
>> "arch/powerpc/platforms/myplatform/myboard_setup.c" file
>> or is the documentation the existing "*.c" c files under 
>> arch/powerpc/platforms ?
>>
>> Since I have a 82xx board I assume that "myboard_setup.c" file shall be 
>> put under arch/powerpc/platforms/82xx.
>>     
>
> Maybe.  Which 82xx is it?  There is a notable difference
> between, say, the 824x boards and the 827x boards.  If it
> is the latter, perhaps the existing 82xx/ pq2 or mpc8272
> parts are already sufficient?
>
> If it is the former group, 824x, perhaps some of the parts
> in embedded6xx/ are usable?  Also note that I am working on
> publishing an 824x StorCenter port under embedded6xx/ at
> this time as well.  First patches were posted to linuxppc-dev
> list at ozlabs.org.
>
> HTH,
> jdl
>
>
>   
The board is based on PPC8265.

Cheers // Matias

ppc vs powerpc

[Jon Smirl]

Is the plan for ppc to be completely merged with powerpc and then be
eliminated? If so, how close is this to completion?

What should we do with ppc users of mpc-i2c? If the plan is to
eliminate ppc I would say to just copy the existing driver and then
delete the old version when the rest of ppc gets deleted.

-- 
Jon Smirl
jonsmirl@gmail.com

Re: ppc vs powerpc

[Grant Likely]

On 12/10/07, Jon Smirl <jonsmirl@gmail.com> wrote:
> Is the plan for ppc to be completely merged with powerpc and then be
> eliminated? If so, how close is this to completion?
>
> What should we do with ppc users of mpc-i2c? If the plan is to
> eliminate ppc I would say to just copy the existing driver and then
> delete the old version when the rest of ppc gets deleted.

arch/ppc is scheduled to be removed middle of 2008.  Don't break
arch/ppc users before then.  Ideally there should be overlap between
the addition of support in arch/powerpc and the removal of support
from arch/ppc.

Personally, I structure the driver to support both platform bus and
of_platform bus.  It's not hard to do and it keeps things
understandable.  Take a look at drivers/block/xsysace for an example.

Cheers,
g.


-- 
Grant Likely, B.Sc., P.Eng.
Secret Lab Technologies Ltd.
grant.likely@secretlab.ca
(403) 399-0195

Re: ppc vs powerpc

[Jon Smirl]

On 12/10/07, Grant Likely <grant.likely@secretlab.ca> wrote:
> On 12/10/07, Jon Smirl <jonsmirl@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Is the plan for ppc to be completely merged with powerpc and then be
> > eliminated? If so, how close is this to completion?
> >
> > What should we do with ppc users of mpc-i2c? If the plan is to
> > eliminate ppc I would say to just copy the existing driver and then
> > delete the old version when the rest of ppc gets deleted.
>
> arch/ppc is scheduled to be removed middle of 2008.  Don't break
> arch/ppc users before then.  Ideally there should be overlap between
> the addition of support in arch/powerpc and the removal of support
> from arch/ppc.
>
> Personally, I structure the driver to support both platform bus and
> of_platform bus.  It's not hard to do and it keeps things
> understandable.  Take a look at drivers/block/xsysace for an example.

I can look at it but I'm not enthused about writing new code to
support something that is scheduled to be deleted in six months. It
would be much simpler to just copy the old driver. I'm spending way
too much time on what I thought was a fairly simple change.

>
> Cheers,
> g.
>
>
> --
> Grant Likely, B.Sc., P.Eng.
> Secret Lab Technologies Ltd.
> grant.likely@secretlab.ca
> (403) 399-0195
>


-- 
Jon Smirl
jonsmirl@gmail.com

Re: ppc vs powerpc

[Jon Smirl]

On 12/10/07, Grant Likely <grant.likely@secretlab.ca> wrote:
> On 12/10/07, Jon Smirl <jonsmirl@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Is the plan for ppc to be completely merged with powerpc and then be
> > eliminated? If so, how close is this to completion?
> >
> > What should we do with ppc users of mpc-i2c? If the plan is to
> > eliminate ppc I would say to just copy the existing driver and then
> > delete the old version when the rest of ppc gets deleted.
>
> arch/ppc is scheduled to be removed middle of 2008.  Don't break
> arch/ppc users before then.  Ideally there should be overlap between
> the addition of support in arch/powerpc and the removal of support
> from arch/ppc.

How can I tell a build for ARCH=ppc vs ARCH=powerpc in Kconfig?

> Personally, I structure the driver to support both platform bus and
> of_platform bus.  It's not hard to do and it keeps things
> understandable.  Take a look at drivers/block/xsysace for an example.
>
> Cheers,
> g.
>
>
> --
> Grant Likely, B.Sc., P.Eng.
> Secret Lab Technologies Ltd.
> grant.likely@secretlab.ca
> (403) 399-0195
>


-- 
Jon Smirl
jonsmirl@gmail.com

Re: ppc vs powerpc

[Tony Breeds]

On Mon, Dec 10, 2007 at 04:54:32PM -0500, Jon Smirl wrote:
 
> How can I tell a build for ARCH=ppc vs ARCH=powerpc in Kconfig?

IIRC ARCH=powerpc will have CONFIG_PPC_MERGE set, arch=ppc will not.

Yours Tony

  linux.conf.au        http://linux.conf.au/ || http://lca2008.linux.org.au/
  Jan 28 - Feb 02 2008 The Australian Linux Technical Conference!