From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <scottwood@freescale.com>
Received: from de01egw02.freescale.net (de01egw02.freescale.net
	[192.88.165.103])
	(using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
	(Client CN "de01egw02.freescale.net",
	Issuer "Thawte Premium Server CA" (verified OK))
	by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 86C76DDEE3
	for <linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org>; Sat, 19 May 2007 05:09:32 +1000 (EST)
Received: from de01smr02.am.mot.com (de01smr02.freescale.net [10.208.0.151])
	by de01egw02.freescale.net (8.12.11/de01egw02) with ESMTP id
	l4IJ9ReB001968
	for <linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org>; Fri, 18 May 2007 12:09:27 -0700 (MST)
Message-ID: <464DF9E5.2040501@freescale.com>
Date: Fri, 18 May 2007 14:09:25 -0500
From: Scott Wood <scottwood@freescale.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Jon Loeliger <jdl@freescale.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] PCI fixes for the MPC8641 Rev 2.0 silicon and Rev
	1.02hardware
References: <1179245829.8132.100.camel@rhino>	
	<1179247809.8132.138.camel@rhino>	
	<46B96294322F7D458F9648B60E15112C23441B@zch01exm26.fsl.freescale.net>	
	<1179417813.8132.250.camel@rhino>	
	<744CD970-5421-47D6-A30A-C7C79BE21BE8@kernel.crashing.org>	
	<1179421139.8132.256.camel@rhino> <464CA302.9060707@freescale.com>	
	<20070518005641.GA27350@localhost.localdomain>	
	<464DB986.20205@freescale.com>	
	<20070518164628.GA16825@ld0162-tx32.am.freescale.net>	
	<464DE2D3.3090805@smiths-aerospace.com>
	<464DE4C7.7030906@freescale.com>	 <464DE5D2.5000301@freescale.com>
	<464DE6C1.2010108@freescale.com>	 <464DE7F7.3030302@freescale.com>
	<464DE8BB.5040601@freescale.com>	
	<1179512385.19664.8.camel@ld0161-tx32>
	<464DEF3C.7070202@freescale.com>
	<1179515137.19664.19.camel@ld0161-tx32>
In-Reply-To: <1179515137.19664.19.camel@ld0161-tx32>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Cc: linuxppc-dev <linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org>, Timur Tabi <timur@freescale.com>,
	Wei Zhang <Wei.Zhang@freescale.com>
List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List <linuxppc-dev.ozlabs.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev>,
	<mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@ozlabs.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://ozlabs.org/pipermail/linuxppc-dev>
List-Post: <mailto:linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org>
List-Help: <mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@ozlabs.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev>,
	<mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@ozlabs.org?subject=subscribe>

Jon Loeliger wrote:
> On Fri, 2007-05-18 at 13:23, Scott Wood wrote:
> 
>>Jon Loeliger wrote:
>>
>>>First of all, I wanted to get away from the notion of calling
>>>anything a "jumper".  What I said to you was to predicate the
>>>clause based on some arbitrary conditional, not just some "jumper
>>>setting."
>>
>>Yes, I like the "hwoption" name better.
> 
> 
> I think my point was missed.  It could be more general
> than "a hardware thing".  Sure, HW contributes.

What, other than hardware differences, would one conditionalize on?

>>No, we were pretty much always talking about a run-time thing.
> 
> 
> On he contrary, here are copies of two pieces of mail from
> roughly May 2006 and Feb 2007 in which CPP and M4 as _compiled_time_
> processing are being discussed.  In the latter, you discuss it more:.

That was a separate discussion for a separate purpose (reducing 
redundancy and duplication among dts files).  I was talking about the 
discussions I had with Timur about a month ago, to which you responded 
with the conditional suggestion.

-Scott