From: Tom Rini <trini@kernel.crashing.org>
To: Dan Malek <dan@embeddededge.com>
Cc: linuxppc-embedded@ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] remove obsolete arch/ppc/8xx_io/uart.c
Date: Thu, 7 Oct 2004 15:09:25 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20041007220924.GT14773@smtp.west.cox.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <0927BD6D-18A9-11D9-9049-003065F9B7DC@embeddededge.com>
On Thu, Oct 07, 2004 at 05:37:06PM -0400, Dan Malek wrote:
>
> On Oct 7, 2004, at 2:48 PM, Tom Rini wrote:
>
> >> CONFIG_8xx_UART
> >> CONFIG_SMC2_UART
> >> CONFIG_ALTSMC2
> >> CONFIG_CONS_SMC2
> >> CONFIG_USE_SCC_IO
> >
> >Not all of these options exist in linux-2.6.
>
> Why not? They must or some equivalent to get these features.
> I dislike this 2.6 "forward progress" that continually removes
> features we have deemed necessary in previous kernel versions.
Because some stuff to the now-dead uart driver never made it past
linuxppc-2.5. Specifically I believe it was 8xx_UART that didn't.
> >I think this had been discussed before, but perhaps not. What should
> >happen at some point is something more like "Do you hae SMC1 ? What is
> >it? Do you have SMC2 ? What is it? Do youhave SCC1? What is it?" and so
> >on. For now, I wouldn't worry about it.
>
> I don't understand the "what is it?" part of these questions. As I
> have continually pointed out over the years, we don't have "SMC" or
> "SCC" drivers.
Right. But we don't have ethernet and serial on SMC1. What I was
talking about is we ask what driver should take care of SMC1, SMC2,
SCC1, and so on. You could just be smart and not configure 2
drivers to use the same SMC or SCC as well. What Robert was talking
about was making the system smart enough to not let you do it. And
with 2.6 Kconfig syntax, this isn't as painful as it would have been
before.
--
Tom Rini
http://gate.crashing.org/~trini/
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-10-07 22:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <1096517265.27208.18.camel@localhost.localdomain>
2004-10-07 15:40 ` [PATCH] remove obsolete arch/ppc/8xx_io/uart.c Tom Rini
2004-10-07 16:00 ` Robert P. J. Day
2004-10-07 16:47 ` Robert P. J. Day
2004-10-07 17:30 ` Tom Rini
2004-10-07 18:09 ` Robert P. J. Day
2004-10-07 18:48 ` Tom Rini
2004-10-07 19:01 ` Robert P. J. Day
2004-10-07 21:37 ` Dan Malek
2004-10-07 22:09 ` Tom Rini [this message]
2004-10-07 22:27 ` Robert P. J. Day
2004-10-07 22:42 ` Tom Rini
2004-10-08 2:21 ` Dan Malek
2004-10-08 14:22 ` Tom Rini
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=20041007220924.GT14773@smtp.west.cox.net \
--to=trini@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=dan@embeddededge.com \
--cc=linuxppc-embedded@ozlabs.org \
/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).