From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from am1outboundpool.messaging.microsoft.com (am1ehsobe004.messaging.microsoft.com [213.199.154.207]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "mail.global.frontbridge.com", Issuer "MSIT Machine Auth CA 2" (not verified)) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7457F2C0154 for ; Tue, 13 Aug 2013 08:04:46 +1000 (EST) Message-ID: <1376345070.20487.41.camel@snotra.buserror.net> Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/1] powerpc/embedded6xx: Add support for Motorola/Emerson MVME5100. From: Scott Wood To: Stephen N Chivers Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2013 17:04:30 -0500 In-Reply-To: References: <1375985244.4514.21.camel@snotra.buserror.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: Chris Proctor , linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, paulus@samba.org List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Tue, 2013-08-13 at 08:57 +1100, Stephen N Chivers wrote: > Scott Wood wrote on 08/09/2013 04:07:24 AM: > > > From: Scott Wood > > To: Kumar Gala > > Cc: Stephen N Chivers , , > > , Chris Proctor > > Date: 08/09/2013 04:08 AM > > Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/1] powerpc/embedded6xx: Add support for > > Motorola/Emerson MVME5100. > > > > On Thu, 2013-08-08 at 10:30 -0500, Kumar Gala wrote: > > > Also, we don't take full defconfigs in the tree, look at 'make > > savedefconfig' > > > > Why does this board need its own defconfig at all? Just add it to > > ppc6xx_defconfig. > > The boards firmware as stated above is PPCBug. PPCBug is not Open Firmware > compatible. > > There is no U-Boot support for the board. I'm not sure why that precludes the use of ppc6xx_defconfig... > In ppc6xx_defconfig the e100 network device and NFS support is modular and > that forces the use of an initrd. OK, then let's enable those in ppc6xx_defconfig. We do in a lot of the other defconfigs (such as 85xx and derivatives). > PPCBugs network boot command takes only one file argument and so makes > it difficult to use an initrd. > > So the choices are: > - Providing a defconfig for the board, > - Building the kernel with the initrd embedded in it, > - Finding an alternative boot loader, > - Doing the board support for U-Boot. > The first choice is simple and documents the configuration of the > board without mixing it into ppc6xx_defconfig. The first choice means your board would get much less build-testing, and would increase maintenance costs of defconfig changes (and/or lead to divergence from other defconfigs that doesn't actually have anything to do with this board or its use cases). The fifth choice is "add what you need to ppc6xx_defconfig". Within reason of course, but I think a common PCI network device and NFS root support is reasonable. -Scott