Which microcode patch for MPC870?

Which microcode patch for MPC870?

[Shawn Jin]

Hi,

Which microcode patch should be selected for MPC870? In the old 2.4
kernel, the CONFIG_UCODE_PATCH was selected. What's the corresponding
config: CONFIG_USB_SOF_UCODE_PATCH or CONFIG_I2C_SPI_UCODE_PATCH or
CONFIG_I2C_SPI_SMC1_UCODE_PATCH? Since my board doesn't have USB, I
believe USB microcode is irrelevant here. So it comes down the other
two choices. Of course do I really need the patch? My board has I2C
and SMC1, but no SPI.

I chose CONFIG_I2C_SPI_UCODE_PATCH as an experiment but got the
following compilation error:
  CC      arch/powerpc/sysdev/micropatch.o
arch/powerpc/sysdev/micropatch.c: In function 'cpm_load_patch':
arch/powerpc/sysdev/micropatch.c:629: error: expected '=', ',', ';',
'asm' or '__attribute__' before '*' token
arch/powerpc/sysdev/micropatch.c:629: error: 'spp' undeclared (first
use in this function)
arch/powerpc/sysdev/micropatch.c:629: error: (Each undeclared
identifier is reported only once
arch/powerpc/sysdev/micropatch.c:629: error: for each function it appears in.)
cc1: warnings being treated as errors
arch/powerpc/sysdev/micropatch.c:630: warning: ISO C90 forbids mixed
declarations and code
arch/powerpc/sysdev/micropatch.c:671: error: 'spi_t' undeclared (first
use in this function)
arch/powerpc/sysdev/micropatch.c:671: error: expected expression
before ')' token
arch/powerpc/sysdev/micropatch.c:630: warning: unused variable 'smp'
make[1]: *** [arch/powerpc/sysdev/micropatch.o] Error 1

Obviously there is no spi_t declaration in 2.6.33.5. So where is this
spi_t declared?

Thanks a lot,
-Shawn.

Re: Which microcode patch for MPC870?

[Anton Vorontsov]

Hello,

On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 11:40:21PM -0700, Shawn Jin wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> Which microcode patch should be selected for MPC870? In the old 2.4
> kernel, the CONFIG_UCODE_PATCH was selected. What's the corresponding
> config: CONFIG_USB_SOF_UCODE_PATCH or CONFIG_I2C_SPI_UCODE_PATCH or
> CONFIG_I2C_SPI_SMC1_UCODE_PATCH? Since my board doesn't have USB, I
> believe USB microcode is irrelevant here. So it comes down the other
> two choices. Of course do I really need the patch? My board has I2C
> and SMC1, but no SPI.
> 
> I chose CONFIG_I2C_SPI_UCODE_PATCH as an experiment but got the
> following compilation error:

These errors were fixed by

http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/58262/
and
http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/58263/

Thanks,

>   CC      arch/powerpc/sysdev/micropatch.o
> arch/powerpc/sysdev/micropatch.c: In function 'cpm_load_patch':
> arch/powerpc/sysdev/micropatch.c:629: error: expected '=', ',', ';',
> 'asm' or '__attribute__' before '*' token
> arch/powerpc/sysdev/micropatch.c:629: error: 'spp' undeclared (first
> use in this function)
> arch/powerpc/sysdev/micropatch.c:629: error: (Each undeclared
> identifier is reported only once
> arch/powerpc/sysdev/micropatch.c:629: error: for each function it appears in.)
> cc1: warnings being treated as errors
> arch/powerpc/sysdev/micropatch.c:630: warning: ISO C90 forbids mixed
> declarations and code
> arch/powerpc/sysdev/micropatch.c:671: error: 'spi_t' undeclared (first
> use in this function)
> arch/powerpc/sysdev/micropatch.c:671: error: expected expression
> before ')' token
> arch/powerpc/sysdev/micropatch.c:630: warning: unused variable 'smp'
> make[1]: *** [arch/powerpc/sysdev/micropatch.o] Error 1
> 
> Obviously there is no spi_t declaration in 2.6.33.5. So where is this
> spi_t declared?

-- 
Anton Vorontsov
email: cbouatmailru@gmail.com
irc://irc.freenode.net/bd2

Re: Which microcode patch for MPC870?

[Shawn Jin]

>> Which microcode patch should be selected for MPC870? In the old 2.4
>> kernel, the CONFIG_UCODE_PATCH was selected. What's the corresponding
>> config: CONFIG_USB_SOF_UCODE_PATCH or CONFIG_I2C_SPI_UCODE_PATCH or
>> CONFIG_I2C_SPI_SMC1_UCODE_PATCH? Since my board doesn't have USB, I
>> believe USB microcode is irrelevant here. So it comes down the other
>> two choices. Of course do I really need the patch? My board has I2C
>> and SMC1, but no SPI.
>>
>> I chose CONFIG_I2C_SPI_UCODE_PATCH as an experiment but got the
>> following compilation error:
>
> These errors were fixed by
>
> http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/58262/
> and
> http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/58263/

Thanks a lot for the info, Anton.

Then the question is which patch should be selected. I don't enable
any patch and the SMC UART works properly. Next I'm going to enable
I2C but I don't know whether a microcode patch is required or not.

Thanks,
-Shawn.