Subject: Re: [PATCH][RFC] OCP support for MPC107 and relatives

From: "Mark A. Greer" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2004 10:33:46 -0700

Adrian Cox wrote:

>On Mon, 2004-06-14 at 18:05, Mark A. Greer wrote:
>
>
>
>>That's great that you're OCP-ifying the mpc10x code!  My only comment is
>>thatI don't like hardcoding the position of an entry in the OCP (e.g.,
>>core_ocp[0].vedor/paddr).  I don't think its safe to assume that any
>>particular piece of code will always know all of the entries in the OCP
>>and therefore what an entry's position will be.  You can use
>>'ocp_for_each_device()' and a routine that checks for the fields that
>>you want to accomplish the same thing.
>>
>>
>
>I'll try to do a new version of the patch at the end of the week.
>
>Would it work to have an empty core_ocp[] array, and then call
>ocp_add_one_device() to insert the entries? That would deal with these
>issues, as the code would look like:
>mpc10x_i2c_ocp.paddr = phys_eumb_base + MPC10X_EUMB_I2C_OFFSET;
>ocp_add_one_device(&mpc10x_i2c_ocp);
>
>Then the MPC106 path would simply not add any entries, rather than
>having to go through and mark them as invalid.
>
>
FWIW, that's fine with me.

Mark

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