From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: In-Reply-To: <20070213004608.GB4894@localhost.localdomain> References: <200702121129.05004.sr@denx.de> <1171281988.20192.1.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1171310108.20192.7.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1171311802.20192.15.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20070213004608.GB4894@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v752.2) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed Message-Id: <8DEFFE52-2326-43A9-9719-15E04EF17D3A@kernel.crashing.org> From: Kumar Gala Subject: Re: [PATCH] ppc: Add support for AMCC Taishan 440GX eval board Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2007 23:28:17 -0600 To: David Gibson Cc: Jon Loeliger , Roland Dreier , linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, linuxppc-embedded@ozlabs.org, Stefan Roese List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Feb 12, 2007, at 6:46 PM, David Gibson wrote: > On Mon, Feb 12, 2007 at 02:41:36PM -0600, Kumar Gala wrote: >> >> On Feb 12, 2007, at 2:23 PM, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: >> >>> On Mon, 2007-02-12 at 14:16 -0600, Jon Loeliger wrote: >>>> So, like, the other day Benjamin Herrenschmidt mumbled: >>>>> >>>>> Note that there are still things that we might want to change. For >>>>> example, I think we really should look into adding a macro >>>>> mecanism >>>>> and/or an include mecanism to dtc so that we can do things like >>>>> #include >>>>> to get the base processor/SoC definition and then >>>>> "overlay" some properties on top of it (like emac phy mode etc...) >>>> >>>> What do people prefer here? Straight CPP pre-run? >>> >>> CPP pre-run has issue, notably due to the usage of "#" in property >>> names. >> >> You can get around that by invoking cpp with the right flags, I >> looked at doing this a while back and had it working. > > Umm.. which flags? cpp -undef -P -x assembler-with-cpp >>>> Direct support built into dtc to do file-inclusion, macros? >>> >>> We aren't sure yet, though David might have ideas. >> >> Would be nice for simple math as well (addition, subtraction, bitwise >> ops, and shifts). For example was thinking that having some macro's >> around the PCI dev node's would make it a bit more readable to mere >> mortals. > > Yes. Adding an expression model would be more complex though. Is there somewhere we can grab one from? - k