From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2005 09:27:53 -0700 From: Tom Rini To: Kumar Gala Message-ID: <20050817162753.GP8214@smtp.west.cox.net> References: <20050817153013.GO8214@smtp.west.cox.net> <184D9473-D0E7-4424-A25F-60381472C10A@freescale.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <184D9473-D0E7-4424-A25F-60381472C10A@freescale.com> Cc: linuxppc-dev list , David Woodhouse , linuxppc-embedded list Subject: Re: [PATCH] Use platform device for 8250 registration List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Wed, Aug 17, 2005 at 11:16:39AM -0500, Kumar Gala wrote: > > On Aug 17, 2005, at 10:30 AM, Tom Rini wrote: > > >On Wed, Aug 17, 2005 at 10:22:54AM -0500, Kumar Gala wrote: > > > > > >>>So long as you convert arch/ppc/boot/ to this as well, why not > >>>(or at > >>>least being able to grab the infos from these structs somehow). > >>> > >>>Once everyone is on a flat tree, I don't object to killing all of > >>>the > >>>old-style uart definitions steaming out of . > >>> > >> > >>Tom, do have a test system that I can look at converting that you > >>would be willing to test the changes to arch/ppc/boot for me. > >> > > > >With Matt's patch, you could boot a PReP kernel (no VGA con) :) > >But if you convert LoPEC, I'll throw the kernel at it. > > Does PReP use bootcode? I thought it was OF based, but what do I know. In qemu? Yes, it does. -- Tom Rini http://gate.crashing.org/~trini/