From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from e5.ny.us.ibm.com (e5.ny.us.ibm.com [32.97.182.145]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "e5.ny.us.ibm.com", Issuer "Equifax" (verified OK)) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5DC0DDDEEC for ; Fri, 28 Mar 2008 11:42:21 +1100 (EST) Received: from d01relay04.pok.ibm.com (d01relay04.pok.ibm.com [9.56.227.236]) by e5.ny.us.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m2S0gGEt023212 for ; Thu, 27 Mar 2008 20:42:16 -0400 Received: from d01av02.pok.ibm.com (d01av02.pok.ibm.com [9.56.224.216]) by d01relay04.pok.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v8.7) with ESMTP id m2S0gGOH1089884 for ; Thu, 27 Mar 2008 20:42:16 -0400 Received: from d01av02.pok.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d01av02.pok.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.13.3) with ESMTP id m2S0gGBn001474 for ; Thu, 27 Mar 2008 20:42:16 -0400 Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2008 19:39:25 -0500 From: Josh Boyer To: David Gibson Subject: Re: [PATCH] [POWERPC] 4xx: Create common ppc4xx_reset_system() in ppc4xx_soc.c Message-ID: <20080327193925.2781a6e2@zod.rchland.ibm.com> In-Reply-To: <20080327235618.GA16141@localhost.localdomain> References: <1206629011-28821-1-git-send-email-sr@denx.de> <20080327235618.GA16141@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, Stefan Roese List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Fri, 28 Mar 2008 10:56:18 +1100 David Gibson wrote: > On Thu, Mar 27, 2008 at 03:43:31PM +0100, Stefan Roese wrote: > > This patch creates a common system reset routine for all 40x and 44x > > systems. Previously only a 44x routine existed. But since this system > > reset via the debug control register is common for 40x and 44x let's > > share this code for all those platforms in ppc4xx_soc.c. > > Well... they're sort of common. The source looks the same, but the > SPR number of DBCR0 is different on 40x and 44x, which is a > potentially serious gotcha. Except that since 40x and 44x should never be built into the same kernel. So the #defines for DBCR0 should be picked correctly from reg_booke.h. I thought about that too, but I can't see where it will be an issue in practice. josh