Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] fsl_soc.c cleanup

From: Scott Wood <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2007 10:51:40 -0500

Kumar Gala wrote:
> Yep.  However, after some discussion with Segher on this for 
> 83xx/85xx/86xx I think we want to keep the reg prop and have it cover 
> the initial soc registers [size on 83xx is 0x100, size on 85xx/86xx 
> would be 0x1000].
> 
> What we need is a saner way to determine immr on 82xx & 8xx.  Segher's 
> rule is that a given "reg" prop shouldn't overlap w/any other reg.  We 
> currently violate that on 8xx.  Not as clear on 82xx if we do that.
> 
> I'm thinking on 8xx we should move to grabbing a top level compat value 
> (mpc8xx) and use the SPRN_IMMR to set immrbase.

Any particular reason to special-case it, when we already need code to 
do it the other way for every other fsl soc?

> On mpc82xx-pq2 we could 
> add a immr "device" to search for.

Enh.  The soc node *is* the immr "device".  I'd rather add a node for 
the "initial" registers (they generally don't involve configuring the 
immr "bus" itself, but rather the chipselect bus and other miscellaneous 
things) if needed, get rid of /soc/reg, and have ranges cover the whole 
immr.

And why is 82xx-pq2 special?  Wouldn't you need this on 83xx, 85xx, and 
86xx as well?

-Scott