From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Prabhakar Kushwaha <prabhakar@freescale.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2012 12:44:06 +0530
Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH 1/4] doc: Add documentation for mpc85xx
 debugger support
In-Reply-To: <20120307123047.6586D202C7F@gemini.denx.de>
References: <1329296027-28471-1-git-send-email-prabhakar@freescale.com>
	<20120306143923.69215202D7D@gemini.denx.de>
	<071A08F2C6A57E4E94D980ECA553F874575244@039-SN1MPN1-005.039d.mgd.msft.net>
	<20120307062452.8B48D202C7F@gemini.denx.de>
	<4F572159.9020303@freescale.com>
	<20120307123047.6586D202C7F@gemini.denx.de>
Message-ID: <4F5EF3BE.1040209@freescale.com>
List-Id: <u-boot.lists.denx.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: u-boot@lists.denx.de

Hi Wolfgang,

On Wednesday 07 March 2012 06:00 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear Prabhakar Kushwaha,
>
> In message<4F572159.9020303@freescale.com>  you wrote:
>>> Also, what's the "V1_V2" ? Are there also other systems (say, e500 v3
>>> cores), and are this not affected? We already have CONFIG_E500 and
>>> CONFIG_E500MC so CONFIG_E500_V1_V2 appears to belong to this group,
>>> but if I understand your intentions it does something completely
>>> unrelated.
>> V1_V2 is used because it applied to e500v1 and e500v2 not e500mc
>> processor. So CONFIG_E500MC cant be used. Also I cant use CONFIG_E500 as
>> it refer the entire e500 family which includes e500mc.
> Hm... I am not sure if CONFIG_E500 was supposed to include
> CONFIG_E500MC; it's nowhere documented.  Let's assume it is.
>
> What happens if you enable this code on a E500MC system?
>

Debug  restrictions are not valid for e500mc system.

At first sight it should not hurt e500mc execution (other than some 
seemingly unnecessary steps). However i will check this point.

Regards,
Prabhakar