From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from e31.co.us.ibm.com (e31.co.us.ibm.com [32.97.110.149]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "e31.co.us.ibm.com", Issuer "Equifax" (verified OK)) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 51A33DDED8 for ; Wed, 16 May 2007 12:21:16 +1000 (EST) Received: from d03relay02.boulder.ibm.com (d03relay02.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.195.227]) by e31.co.us.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l4G2LD3e009660 for ; Tue, 15 May 2007 22:21:13 -0400 Received: from d03av04.boulder.ibm.com (d03av04.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.195.170]) by d03relay02.boulder.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v8.3) with ESMTP id l4G2LAMT231136 for ; Tue, 15 May 2007 20:21:12 -0600 Received: from d03av04.boulder.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d03av04.boulder.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.13.3) with ESMTP id l4G2LAAi027132 for ; Tue, 15 May 2007 20:21:10 -0600 Date: Tue, 15 May 2007 21:29:59 -0500 From: Josh Boyer To: dwg@au1.ibm.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] Derive ebc ranges property from EBC registers Message-ID: <20070516022958.GB25075@crusty.rchland.ibm.com> References: <20070515045415.5B05ADDECE@ozlabs.org> <1179233998.3084.28.camel@zod.rchland.ibm.com> <20070515230930.GB20290@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <20070515230930.GB20290@localhost.localdomain> Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Wed, May 16, 2007 at 09:09:30AM +1000, David Gibson wrote: > > Do we want a "ranges;" here as a placeholder? I don't see where it's > > absolutely required, but it makes me feel better for some reason... > > Absolutely not. An empty ranges property indicates that the child bus > address space is the same as the parent bus address space. If we're > using the chip-select/offset addressing form for the EBC peripherals, > that's manifestly not the case. Ah ok. My lack of device tree experience showing through again. > > So this sets the ranges for the EBC bus, but not the "regs" properties > > of the child nodes. Without that, the child nodes will not be mapped to > > the correct addresses... > > Well, no, the child reg properties can't be deduced from the EBC > registers. Right, I didn't mean to imply the could be. > > Did you have a plan on how to fixup the child "regs" properties so that > > when the DIP switches are flipped around, the children show up > > correctly? > > Well, on Ebony (AFAICT), the only child reg property that might need > adjustment is the small flash. My MTD enabling patch includes some > code in the boot wrapper to toggle the appropriate bit in it's reg > property. Hm, ok. On Bamboo, it's more complicated. I'll have to think of something there I suppose. josh