From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from gateway-1237.mvista.com (gateway-1237.mvista.com [63.81.120.158]) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1062F67B69 for ; Thu, 21 Sep 2006 07:56:52 +1000 (EST) Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2006 14:57:38 -0700 From: "Mark A. Greer" To: Benjamin Herrenschmidt Subject: Re: [PATCH] Start arch/powerpc/boot code reorganization Message-ID: <20060920215738.GC24809@mag.az.mvista.com> References: <17680.30367.157642.674242@cargo.ozlabs.ibm.com> <20060920012042.GA28489@mag.az.mvista.com> <1158721828.3043.13.camel@vader.jdub.homelinux.org> <1158787957.6002.307.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <1158787957.6002.307.camel@localhost.localdomain> Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, Paul Mackerras List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Thu, Sep 21, 2006 at 07:32:37AM +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > > > So please comment the nastiness with a big "HACK HACK HACK" comment and > > make sure it only ever gets used on systems where nothing better is > > available, and all should be fine. > > An option is to call it something like fw,address to avoid confusion and > make it somewhat clearer that it's really a firmware address useable > within the context of the firmware... Okay. We did talk about that but then we realized that "address" was for vaddrs. We thought of other names like "bootwrapper-vaddr" etc. but "fw,address" or "fw,vaddr" are probably better--they show that the vaddr was setup by the fw. Comments? Mark