From: Kalle Pokki <kalle.pokki@iki.fi>
To: Vitaly Bordug <vbordug@ru.mvista.com>
Cc: linuxppc-embedded@ozlabs.org, Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] CPM_UART: Fixed SMC handling for CPM2 processors
Date: Mon, 6 Nov 2006 22:49:49 +0200 (EET) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0611062237300.16727@host32.eke.fi> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20061106205543.43b2aacb@localhost.localdomain>
On Mon, 6 Nov 2006, Vitaly Bordug wrote:
>> This patch renames these the two existing resources, and introduces a
>> new one, "pram_base", which is a pointer to the parameter RAM. The
>> parameter RAM for SMC1 and SMC2 is put in the first 128 bytes of the
>> DPRAM. This memory was already reserved from the DPRAM memory
>> allocator for this purpose.
>>
> Well just one objection. pram_base should not be a device unless it applies to all the stuff of
> SoC family which is not the case.
>
> For this aim, I'd put what you need into the platform_data, or follow the same approach 8xx stuff having.
I'm not sure I follow you now. "pram_base" is not a device by itself, but
it's just another resource in the PQ2 version of the SMC devices in the
platform_data. So the resource is only present when it is needed, and for
other platform devices that don't have this resource, the cpm_uart code
does nothing (as it should not).
The only difference to the 8xx version is the new "pram_base" resource,
and it is required with PQ2, right?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-11-06 20:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-11-06 13:29 [PATCH] CPM_UART: Fixed SMC handling for CPM2 processors Kalle Pokki
2006-11-06 17:55 ` Vitaly Bordug
2006-11-06 20:49 ` Kalle Pokki [this message]
2006-11-07 12:08 ` Vitaly Bordug
2006-11-07 13:21 ` Kalle Pokki
2006-11-07 14:47 ` Vitaly Bordug
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2007-02-12 10:33 Heiko Schocher
2007-02-12 17:55 ` Vitaly Bordug
2007-02-13 8:09 ` Heiko Schocher
2007-02-13 11:42 ` Vitaly Bordug
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=Pine.LNX.4.64.0611062237300.16727@host32.eke.fi \
--to=kalle.pokki@iki.fi \
--cc=linuxppc-embedded@ozlabs.org \
--cc=paulus@samba.org \
--cc=vbordug@ru.mvista.com \
/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).