Subject: Re: [PATCH] powerpc: Fix PowerPC 750CL CPU features

From: Segher Boessenkool <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2007 21:24:26 +0200

>> The difference between these two is
>>
>> #define CPU_FTRS_750GX  (CPU_FTR_DUAL_PLL_750FX | 
>> CPU_FTR_HAS_HIGH_BATS)
>> #define CPU_FTRS_750    (CPU_FTR_COMMON)
>>
>> 750GX excludes COMMON, which seems like a bug.  With
>
> CPU_FTR_COMMON is actually a nop in this case anyway.  It should
> probably be listed for "completeness", but it's defined to be 0 so it
> doesn't really do anything.

Well you *can* have SMP 750 systems.  Not that Linux can
handle them but...  ;-)

>> Either way, it seems a good idea to create a CPU_FTRS_750CL,
>> the CL is an evolution of the CX, not the FX/GX (in name
>> at least, dunno about the gory details).
>
> I can do that, or I can just do:
>
> CPU_FTRS_750 | CPU_FTR_HAS_HIGH_BATS

Yeah, you can #define CPU_FTRS_750CL that way too.
Most current defines should be like that if you ask me,
it's a whole lot of copy'n'waste right now.

>>> -		.cpu_setup		= __setup_cpu_750cx,
>>> +		.cpu_setup		= __setup_cpu_750fx,
>>
>> Same thing here.  Are you sure 750CL doesn't need
>> the NAP workaround?  [Is anyone sure the 750CX
>> actually needs it -- the comment in cpu_setup_6xx.S
>> doesn't instill much confidence.]
>
> This should be fine.

Okay.  The name isn't fine though.

Segher