Hello Kumar, Kumar Gala wrote: [...] >> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/platforms/83xx/kmeter1.c >> b/arch/powerpc/platforms/83xx/kmeter1.c >> new file mode 100644 >> index 0000000..99cf5c6 >> --- /dev/null >> +++ b/arch/powerpc/platforms/83xx/kmeter1.c >> @@ -0,0 +1,170 @@ >> +/* [...] >> + np = of_find_compatible_node(NULL, "network", "ucc_geth"); >> + if (np != NULL) { >> + uint svid; >> + >> + /* handle mpc8360ea rev.2.1 erratum 2: RGMII Timing */ >> + svid = mfspr(SPRN_SVR); >> + if (svid == 0x80480021) { >> + void __iomem *immap; >> + >> + immap = ioremap(get_immrbase() + 0x14a8, 8); > > we should add a proper device node to cover whatever register space this > is.
What if we do something like the following: 1) add in the soc node an "errata" node and in this "errata" node we can add all CPU specific errata as an example the qe_enet10 errata, which above code covers: soc8...@e0000000 { [...] errata { device_type = "errata"; compatible = "fsl,mpc83xx_errata"; #address-cells = <1>; #size-cells = <1>; qe_ene...@14a8 { device_type = "errata"; compatible = "fsl,mpc83xx_errata_qe_enet10"; reg = <0x14a8 0x08>; }; }; [...] }; 2) we add in arch/powerpc/sysdev/fsl_soc.c a static int __init mpc83xx_errata_init(void) function, which holds the code for the errata If you agree with that, I can make a patch ... Hmm.. Is it OK, if I first sent a v2 of the "83xx: add support for the kmeter1 board." with the QE_ENET10 errata in kmeter1.c (as it is also for the mpc836x_mds board), and then send a seperate patch, which removes this errata from the two boards? bye Heiko -- DENX Software Engineering GmbH, MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev