From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from gate.crashing.org (gate.crashing.org [63.228.1.57]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4FBD5DDDE7 for ; Sat, 18 Aug 2007 15:29:10 +1000 (EST) In-Reply-To: <18118.13541.470351.661964@cargo.ozlabs.ibm.com> References: <18117.22358.723442.148999@cargo.ozlabs.ibm.com> <18118.13541.470351.661964@cargo.ozlabs.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v752.2) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed Message-Id: From: Kumar Gala Subject: Re: [PATCH] [POWERPC] Fix interrupt routing and setup of ULI M1575 on FSL boards Date: Sat, 18 Aug 2007 00:30:59 -0500 To: Paul Mackerras Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Aug 17, 2007, at 6:53 PM, Paul Mackerras wrote: > Kumar Gala writes: > >> Its a regression in that the ULI M1575 doesn't really work properly >> on some of these boards in certain situations. > > Well, "it doesn't work" isn't of itself a regression, a regression is > "it used to work and now it doesn't". Interesting, maybe I was grouping both of these together as things that could go in after the -rc1. I was under the impression that bug fixes could also go in post -rc1. > In any case the lateness x largeness product (LxL) of that patch is a > bit too high. Is there a simpler way to fix it that doesn't involve > moving all that code around? I'm not really sure how to accomplish that. I could possibly duplicate the 'fixes' in each board port but that seems pointless and I doubt would reduce the code modifications amount any. Most of this has to due with the kernel / firmware / device tree interface. If we have a new firmware that modifies the memory map and requires changes to the device tree and kernel is that a fix? I understand the concern related to the LxL. I'd also say the set of users this effects is very small since its just the two boards. I leave it up to you if you want to grab this patch or not for 2.6.23. If not please pull all these into your for-2.6.24 branch. - k