From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: In-Reply-To: <20050608092453.GA11455@iram.es> References: <20050608092453.GA11455@iram.es> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v619.2) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Message-Id: <3fc1f9541242ec650a5d1d2f188b23cd@freescale.com> From: Kumar Gala Date: Wed, 8 Jun 2005 09:36:06 -0500 To: "Gabriel Paubert" Cc: linuxppc-dev list , Linux PPC Embedded list Subject: Re: [UPDATE] Getting ownership for various boards/platforms configs List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Gabriel, Agreed, but the question on the table is ownership of the current code. - kumar On Jun 8, 2005, at 4:24 AM, Gabriel Paubert wrote: > On Tue, Jun 07, 2005 at 04:47:35PM -0500, Kumar Gala wrote: >> The following boards have no owners and if they dont get one the plan >> is to kill them: >> >> ep405 >> mvme5100 >> pcore > > Actually mvme5100 and pplus could easily be merged with generic > PreP IIRC. At least I wrote a bootloader that remapped my > MVME2400/2600/2700 to look like an MVME5100 (CHRP memory map > but residual data and no OF). This allows much larger > windows to map to the VME bus (which is often very > sparsely populated). > > The only real difference at boot between MVME5100 and > pplus is the mapping of physical addresses to PCI > I/O and memory space, and perhaps also the way to access > the console device. But I don't have any MVME5100 nor > do I plan do buy one (perhaps an MVME6100 but the host > bridge is completely different). > > The question is whether we want a residual data to > pseudo OF device-tree translator in the bootloader > or another way of passing board data to the kernel. > > Gabriel