From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2007 11:47:52 +1000 From: David Gibson To: Scott Wood Subject: Re: [PATCH 12/20] bootwrapper: Add 8xx cuboot support. Message-ID: <20070822014752.GG12472@localhost.localdomain> References: <20070820173920.GA30546@ld0162-tx32.am.freescale.net> <20070820174001.GK30562@ld0162-tx32.am.freescale.net> <20070821024432.GL15469@localhost.localdomain> <46CB10C5.2090405@freescale.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <46CB10C5.2090405@freescale.com> Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, paulus@samba.org List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Tue, Aug 21, 2007 at 11:20:21AM -0500, Scott Wood wrote: > David Gibson wrote: > > On Mon, Aug 20, 2007 at 12:40:01PM -0500, Scott Wood wrote: > > > >>This allows booting on legacy, non-device-tree aware versions of > >>U-boot. > > > > > > Is this really sufficient for all 8xx platforms? > > It should be enough for all u-boot-based 8xx boards, barring some u-boot > which needs special fixups (as is done in cuboot-pq2.c). If such a need > arises, they can be added to cuboot-8xx.c (if they're generic enough to > work on all boards, even if not actually needed) or to a board-specific > platform file (which can coexist just fine with the generic 8xx > one). Ok. Presumably our bd_t won't exactly line up for all 8xx (since it varies from platform to platform, yes?) - but I gather the only bits we use do match up. That's probably worth a comment, so that someone doesn't try using some later bd_t field which is only in the right place for some 8xx systems. Otherwise, Acked-by: David Gibson -- 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