From: "Bhupender Saharan" <bhupi.saharan@gmail.com>
To: "Bizhan Gholikhamseh (bgholikh)" <bgholikh@cisco.com>
Cc: linuxppc-embedded@ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: ARCH=ppc or ARCH=powerpc
Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2007 19:30:33 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <720399a30706271930i6a45cbbbsb847dc2dd732ca5c@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <F795765B112E7344AF36AA911279641502D1A42C@xmb-sjc-212.amer.cisco.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1301 bytes --]
Hi,
All the new development is happening in arch/powerpc architecure. So it is
good to use this architecure if you are upgrading the kernel. But it might
not work with kernel 1.1.2, As arch/powerpc need a structure like open
firmware for the parameters.
If you want to stick to 1.1.2 u-boot version then you shall use arch/ppc
architecure.
Regards
Bhupi
On 6/27/07, Bizhan Gholikhamseh (bgholikh) <bgholikh@cisco.com> wrote:
>
> Hi All,
> Sorry for asking this question again, I am still not clear on some of the
> issues.
> Background:
> We have developed a custom board based on Freescale reference board:
> MPC8555_CDS with MPC8541E processor running Linux 2.6.11 and uboot 1.1.2version.
>
> I would like to update the Linux kernel to the latest available kernel
> 2.6.21.
> Here are my questions:
> 1- Should I use ARCH=ppc or ARCH=powerpc to build the kernel?
> 2- I have seen similar filenames under arch/ppc and arch/powerpc, which
> one applies to MPC8541E?
> 3- Once I build the kernel, could I load the kernel with uboot version
> 1.1.2 or not? if not what I should do?
>
> Many thanks in advance,
> Bizhan
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Linuxppc-embedded mailing list
> Linuxppc-embedded@ozlabs.org
> https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-embedded
>
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2712 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-06-28 2:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-06-27 21:41 ARCH=ppc or ARCH=powerpc Bizhan Gholikhamseh (bgholikh)
2007-06-28 1:20 ` Kumar Gala
2007-06-28 7:44 ` Erik Christiansen
2007-06-28 8:36 ` Erik Christiansen
2007-06-29 3:15 ` Kumar Gala
2007-07-01 1:07 ` Josh Boyer
2007-06-28 2:30 ` Bhupender Saharan [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2006-08-24 10:28 Benjamin Delagoutte
2006-08-24 12:38 ` Parav Pandit
2006-08-24 12:49 ` Josh Boyer
2006-08-24 12:58 ` Benjamin Delagoutte
2006-08-24 13:07 ` Josh Boyer
2006-08-24 13:26 ` Matt Porter
2006-08-24 13:23 ` Matt Porter
2006-09-15 23:06 ` Shawn Jin
2006-09-15 23:23 ` Josh Boyer
2007-06-28 1:14 ` Kumar Gala
2006-08-24 12:58 ` Parav Pandit
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=720399a30706271930i6a45cbbbsb847dc2dd732ca5c@mail.gmail.com \
--to=bhupi.saharan@gmail.com \
--cc=bgholikh@cisco.com \
--cc=linuxppc-embedded@ozlabs.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).