From: Wolfgang Grandegger <wg@grandegger•com>
To: Grant Likely <grant.likely@secretlab•ca>
Cc: Scott Wood <scottwood@freescale•com>, linuxppc-dev@ozlabs•org
Subject: Re: powerpc/85xx: Add support for the "socrates" board (MPC8544)
Date: Wed, 01 Apr 2009 15:10:31 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <49D367C7.5010802@grandegger.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <fa686aa40904010540h53c8975ao196657f6fdd66583@mail.gmail.com>
Grant Likely wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 1:36 AM, Wolfgang Grandegger <wg@grandegger•com> wrote:
>> Anton Vorontsov wrote:
>>> On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 09:05:28AM -0600, Grant Likely wrote:
>>> [...]
>>>>>>>>> + soc8544@e0000000 {
>>>>>>>>> + #address-cells = <1>;
>>>>>>>>> + #size-cells = <1>;
>>>>>>>>> + device_type = "soc";
>>>>>>>> Drop device_type here too.
>>>>>>> Grrr, I just realized that removing the devices type "soc" has broken
>>>>>>> fsl_get_sys_freq(). See:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://lxr.linux.no/linux+v2.6.29/arch/powerpc/sysdev/fsl_soc.c#L80
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> We need a quick fix and we could take the occasion to establish a common
>>>>>>> function for the MPC52xx as well, but it's not obvious to me how to find
>>>>>>> the SOC node without the device type property.
>>>>>> SoC node should have a compatible property, just like everything else.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> compatible = "fsl,mpc8544-immr"; (immr == Internally Memory Mapped Registers)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Many other boards already do this.
>>>>> Yes, it does, but searching for the SOC node is not straight-forward
>>>>> because there is no common compatibility string but many CPU-specific
>>>>> compatibility strings, e.g. "fsl,mpc8560-immr", etc. Have I missed
>>>>> something?
>>>> Choose a new value ("fsl,mpc-immr" perhaps?), document exactly what it
>>>> means, and add add it to the end of the compatible list.
>>> As Scott Wood once pointed out, IMMR does not exists for MPC85xx
>>> parts. There it's called CCSR.
>>>
>>> See this thread:
>>>
>>> http://www.mail-archive.com/linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org/msg12665.html
>>>
>>> I still think that
>>> "fsl,mpc83NN-immr", "fsl,soc", "simple-bus" for 83xx
>>> and
>>> "fsl,mpc85NN-ccsr", "fsl,soc", "simple-bus" for 85xx
>>>
>>> would be OK, at least to start with. We can always deprecate "fsl,soc"
>>> compatible in favour of something more elegant, but "fsl,soc" should be
>>> just fine to replace device_type = "soc".
>>>
>>> Also, there is another good thing about "fsl,soc" -- U-Boot already
>>> finds it for 83xx CPUs. ;-)
>> Ugh! I just realize the full impact of removing device type "soc". It
>> will break compatibility with U-Boot for many boards. Is it worth it?
>
> Yes, I know this. I'm not asking you to fix all the other boards, but
> make sure that it is not required for the new board.
Hm, I'm confused, if we want to fix this issue we need first to
- fix all functions in fsl_soc.c searching for the compatible string
"fsl,soc" instead of the device type "soc" (or both for backward
compatibility).
- fix U-Boot to find the SOC node by looking for "fsl,soc" to insert the
proper bus-frequency, at least.
That affects *all* boards using CONFIG_FSL_SOC and requires an
up-to-date version of U-Boot for new kernels :-(. If that is fixed, I
can remove the "device_type = "soc";" from socrates.dts (and may more),
but not right now. Or have I missed something?
Wolfgang.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-04-01 13:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-03-19 15:26 powerpc/85xx: Add support for the "socrates" board (MPC8544) Wolfgang Grandegger
2009-03-20 4:10 ` David Gibson
2009-03-20 20:12 ` Wolfgang Grandegger
2009-03-20 22:02 ` Wolfgang Grandegger
2009-03-20 4:26 ` Kumar Gala
2009-03-20 20:16 ` Wolfgang Grandegger
2009-03-20 5:05 ` Grant Likely
2009-03-20 11:57 ` Wolfgang Grandegger
2009-03-31 9:35 ` Wolfgang Grandegger
2009-03-31 13:23 ` Grant Likely
2009-03-31 13:36 ` Wolfgang Grandegger
2009-03-31 15:05 ` Grant Likely
2009-03-31 15:54 ` Anton Vorontsov
2009-03-31 16:02 ` Grant Likely
2009-04-01 7:36 ` Wolfgang Grandegger
2009-04-01 12:40 ` Grant Likely
2009-04-01 13:10 ` Wolfgang Grandegger [this message]
2009-04-01 13:27 ` Kumar Gala
2009-04-01 13:49 ` Grant Likely
2009-04-02 6:38 ` Wolfgang Grandegger
2009-04-02 13:47 ` Kumar Gala
2009-04-02 18:50 ` Wolfgang Grandegger
2009-04-02 19:52 ` Kumar Gala
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=49D367C7.5010802@grandegger.com \
--to=wg@grandegger$(echo .)com \
--cc=grant.likely@secretlab$(echo .)ca \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@ozlabs$(echo .)org \
--cc=scottwood@freescale$(echo .)com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox