From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from ausmtp06.au.ibm.com (ausmtp06.au.ibm.com [202.81.18.155]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "ausmtp06.au.ibm.com", Issuer "Equifax" (verified OK)) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 55A70DDED8 for ; Wed, 16 May 2007 13:13:37 +1000 (EST) Received: from sd0109e.au.ibm.com (d23rh905.au.ibm.com [202.81.18.225]) by ausmtp06.au.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l4G3F2W74849856 for ; Wed, 16 May 2007 13:15:02 +1000 Received: from d23av01.au.ibm.com (d23av01.au.ibm.com [9.190.250.242]) by sd0109e.au.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v8.3) with ESMTP id l4G3H2g7015296 for ; Wed, 16 May 2007 13:17:03 +1000 Received: from d23av01.au.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d23av01.au.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.13.3) with ESMTP id l4G3DUSF016564 for ; Wed, 16 May 2007 13:13:30 +1000 Date: Wed, 16 May 2007 13:13:28 +1000 From: David Gibson To: Josh Boyer Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] Derive ebc ranges property from EBC registers Message-ID: <20070516031328.GA19127@localhost.localdomain> References: <20070515045415.5B05ADDECE@ozlabs.org> <1179233998.3084.28.camel@zod.rchland.ibm.com> <20070515230930.GB20290@localhost.localdomain> <20070516022958.GB25075@crusty.rchland.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <20070516022958.GB25075@crusty.rchland.ibm.com> Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Tue, May 15, 2007 at 09:29:59PM -0500, Josh Boyer wrote: > 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. Want to send me a board manual? I can see if any approach springs to mind. -- David Gibson | I'll have my music baroque, and my code david AT gibson.dropbear.id.au | minimalist, thank you. NOT _the_ _other_ | _way_ _around_! http://www.ozlabs.org/~dgibson