Re: Going from 2.2.12 to 2.2.17pre10

[Michael Lundkvist <ml@epact.se>]

Matt Porter <mmporter@home.com> writes:

> >
> > Getting those changes into PPCBUG would be great.
>
> All you need is a big customer of MCG's to push them to do it.  Money
> is a powerful motivator.
>
OK. Then I'll try the official channels. Is there a name for these
changes so that people know what I'm asking for?

> > How board specific is the residual data that Bugboot needs?
>
> For the single processor boards, the only thing used for the prep port
> is the memory sizing information.  You can always hack that or fix
> the kernel to get memory size from the board registers or VPD (in the
> case of the MVME2400 and later boards).
>

OK. I'll look into that after my vacation.

> > Would it be possible to make one image for 2300 cards and one for 2400
> > cards or does memory size affect the residual data?
>
> See above, you could make a lowest common denominator version of the
> data and lose some memory.  Honestly, I'd just hack the kernel...PPCBUG
> and residual data are a horrible burden.  Look through prep_* and
> mm/init.c for every place residual data is used and hardcode for your
> MCG boards.  In init.c, prep_find_end_of_memory() can detect a Raven
> bridge then use the documented board registers to identify memory size
> (see online user manual).  A 2400 puts memory size across the I2C bus
> in a EEPROM containing all sorts of useful information.  Bug MCG to get
> specs on the layout of these VPD records.
>

Good. That doesnt sound *too* difficult. Thanks for the info.

/Micke

** Sent via the linuxppc-dev mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/