David Gibson wrote: > This doesn't seem right. warp_fixup_one_nor() changes only the > partition's offset, so you're not changing the size of any > partitions. If you're not going to actually use any of the extra > flash space with 64M, I can't see why you'd bother moving around the > partitions you have. > u-boot must be at the bottom of the flash. Also, for the 64M NOR flash you can put everything in the NOR flash, I just don't show the partitions. Booting from NOR is *much* faster than booting from NAND. > > In practice, probably not. We already do a similar fixup on Ebony for > different flash layouts that won't leave the unit names correct. We > really should get this right - and the fdt_set_name() function that's > now in libfdt should make that possible, it just needs some wiring up > to use in the bootwrapper. That can come later, though, for now I > think applying your fixups without correcting the unit addresses is > adequate. > > Ok. >> If anybody has suggestions on better ways to do this, fire away. >> >> And looking at this code, and other board ports, why is sysclk a local >> variable and all the other numbers hardcoded in the args? I left it the >> same way as the others but it does look a bit strange. >> > > I think this also came from Ebony. IIRC, the sysclk isn't strictly > speaking fixed, although it almost always has initialized value. The > point of the local variable was that I planned to replace the static > initialization with some sort of probing once I figured out the > details. > That makes sense. I don't think you can probe for the sysclk on the taco, so I may just put it as a constant to the function.
Cheers, Sean _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev