From: Stefan Roese <sr@denx.de>
To: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/6] PowerPC 440EPx: Sequoia board support
Date: Fri, 3 Aug 2007 08:44:13 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200708030844.13895.sr@denx.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20070802153451.5a92947b@weaponx.rchland.ibm.com>
On Thursday 02 August 2007, Josh Boyer wrote:
> On Mon, 30 Jul 2007 19:16:28 +0400
> > +0400 +++ linux/arch/powerpc/kernel/cputable.c 2007-07-27
> > 20:44:26.000000000 +0400 @@ -1132,6 +1132,42 @@
> > .dcache_bsize = 32,
> > .platform = "ppc440",
> > },
> > + { /* 440EPX - with Security/Kasumi */
> > + .pvr_mask = 0xf0000fff,
> > + .pvr_value = 0x200008D0,
> > + .cpu_name = "440EPX - with Security/Kasumi",
> > + .cpu_features = CPU_FTRS_44X,
> > + .cpu_user_features = COMMON_USER_BOOKE | PPC_FEATURE_HAS_FPU, /*
> > 440EPX has an FPU */ + .icache_bsize = 32,
> > + .dcache_bsize = 32,
> > + },
> > + { /* 440EPX - without Security/Kasumi */
> > + .pvr_mask = 0xf0000fff,
> > + .pvr_value = 0x200008D4,
> > + .cpu_name = "440EPX - no Security/Kasumi",
> > + .cpu_features = CPU_FTRS_44X,
> > + .cpu_user_features = COMMON_USER_BOOKE | PPC_FEATURE_HAS_FPU, /*
> > 440EPX has an FPU */ + .icache_bsize = 32,
> > + .dcache_bsize = 32,
> > + },
> > + { /* 440GRX - with Security/Kasumi */
> > + .pvr_mask = 0xf0000fff,
> > + .pvr_value = 0x200008D8,
> > + .cpu_name = "440GRX - with Security/Kasumi",
> > + .cpu_features = CPU_FTRS_44X,
> > + .cpu_user_features = COMMON_USER_BOOKE, /* 440GRX has no FPU */
> > + .icache_bsize = 32,
> > + .dcache_bsize = 32,
> > + },
> > + { /* 440GRX - without Security/Kasumi */
> > + .pvr_mask = 0xf0000fff,
> > + .pvr_value = 0x200008DC,
> > + .cpu_name = "440GRX - no Security/Kasumi",
> > + .cpu_features = CPU_FTRS_44X,
> > + .cpu_user_features = COMMON_USER_BOOKE, /* 440GRX has no FPU */
> > + .icache_bsize = 32,
> > + .dcache_bsize = 32,
> > + },
>
> Should the 440GRX PVR additions be done in a separate patch? Or is the
> PVR and cpu features truly the only difference between 440EPx and
> 440GRx?
I think it makes sense to add the 440GRx with this patchset too. The 440GRx is
a subset of the 440EPx, missing some stuff like USB, FPU. And the AMCC
Rainier 440GRx eval board is a subset of the Sequoia eval board. So no new
board specific sources should be necessary to support the Rainier, just a
different defconfig file.
Best regards,
Stefan
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-08-03 6:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-07-30 15:16 [PATCH 5/6] PowerPC 440EPx: Sequoia board support Valentine Barshak
2007-08-01 2:15 ` David Gibson
2007-08-01 5:01 ` Segher Boessenkool
2007-08-01 5:05 ` David Gibson
2007-08-02 20:32 ` Josh Boyer
2007-08-03 8:39 ` Kumar Gala
2007-08-03 12:57 ` Josh Boyer
2007-08-02 20:34 ` Josh Boyer
2007-08-03 6:44 ` Stefan Roese [this message]
2007-08-03 11:36 ` Valentine Barshak
2007-08-03 12:25 ` Stefan Roese
2007-08-03 12:35 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2007-10-05 18:36 ` Valentine Barshak
2007-10-05 22:17 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2007-08-03 11:20 ` Valentine Barshak
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=200708030844.13895.sr@denx.de \
--to=sr@denx.de \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@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).