From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2007 13:37:49 +1000 From: David Gibson To: Kumar Gala Subject: Re: [PATCH] [POWERPC] 85xx: Add basic Uniprocessor MPC8572 DS port Message-ID: <20070912033749.GE20218@localhost.localdomain> References: <230A7A2A-3184-4BC2-B8AC-C94090B532B0@kernel.crashing.org> <20070911155558.GA10743@lixom.net> <11B85E70-D643-4013-A9B3-59CD76F9D7AB@kernel.crashing.org> <20070911171521.GB10743@lixom.net> <46E6CE9A.8080402@freescale.com> <20070911173308.GA11951@lixom.net> <46E6D4D4.2050600@freescale.com> <20070912030005.GA20218@localhost.localdomain> <0F762D4F-C84B-4979-92D4-42C5D40AE455@kernel.crashing.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <0F762D4F-C84B-4979-92D4-42C5D40AE455@kernel.crashing.org> Cc: Olof Johansson , linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Tue, Sep 11, 2007 at 10:35:01PM -0500, Kumar Gala wrote: > > On Sep 11, 2007, at 10:00 PM, David Gibson wrote: > > > On Tue, Sep 11, 2007 at 12:59:22PM -0500, Kumar Gala wrote: > >> > >> On Sep 11, 2007, at 12:48 PM, Scott Wood wrote: > >> > >>> Olof Johansson wrote: > >>>> On Tue, Sep 11, 2007 at 12:21:30PM -0500, Scott Wood wrote: > >>>>> Olof Johansson wrote: > >>>>>> On Tue, Sep 11, 2007 at 11:00:28AM -0500, Kumar Gala wrote: > >>>>>>> well the ifdefs are orthogonal. We don't have a way of knowing > >>>>>>> primary from the device tree today. > >>>>>> How about something like "fsl,primary-phb" in the bus device > >>>>>> node? I don't > >>>>>> know, maybe it's already been discussed and turned down for some > >>>>>> reason. > >>>>> It's more of a Linux issue than anything to do with the hardware. > >>>> > >>>> That doesn't stop firmware from telling linux which bus is the > >>>> primary > >>>> one on the system to help out. > >>> > >>> The entire notion of a "primary" PCI bus is due to a Linux flaw. > >>> > >>> If we did put it in the device tree, it should be something like > >>> "linux,primary-phb". But since Linux can tell from the node's > >>> children, > >>> there doesn't seem to be much point. > >> > >> Once someone rights code to do this I'm happy to change over. I took > >> this model of explicitly knowing the primary PHB from the pmac code. > > > > In the meantime, couldn't the code still be merged, using an explicit > > test of the root node's 'compatible' or 'model' properties to decide > > on the right primary bus. > > I will be, I'm not going to wait on having some device tree spec for > this. The board code can handle it until we come to some agreement > on how to do this. I'm in agreement with Scott in that code should > be added to scan or allow explicit determination. Adding a 'prop' to > the device tree just for linux seems a bit silly. Yes, saw that in your new version after I'd posted that. Sorry. -- 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