Sylvain Munaut wrote: > David Brownell wrote: > >> On Wednesday 16 May 2007, Sylvain Munaut wrote: >> >> >>> Well, this comment is not about the patch but about the driver it self, >>> I didn't see it before today. >>> >>> >> It merged earlier in the 2.6.22 cycle. If you don't have criticisms >> about the patch itself, I'll forward it for merging after I get at >> least an ack from Dragos. >> >> > Yes, I saw when looking at the spi-devl archive. Would have been nice if the > author though of cc-ing the ppc-embedded list ;) > > Sorry about not cc-ing ppc-embedded, this was my first kernel patch, I'm not very familiar with the submitting process. > The patch looks ok to me (and needed actually since as Domen pointed > out, 52xx > has been replaced by 5200 in the device tree). > And cell-index has been added to know the psc id without dirty tricks. > > The patch looks ok. I'm currently still using 2.6.20 which still has 52xx. I compiled it for 2.6.22-rc2 and of course this problem was not caught by the compiler. Unfortunately for the board that I'm using (MPC5200-tiny from Pythec), there is no adaptation yet for 2.6.21. >>> - MPC52xx_PA(MPC52xx_PSCx_OFFSET(...)) ??? You should get that from the >>> resource of the platform_device. This macro is just there for early >>> console stuff. >>> >>> >> That PPC_MERGE stuff does look messy. >> >> > Yes, trying to support both in a driver is really not pretty. > Once we can finally get rid of it I'll submit a patch to clear that out. > > A clean up for PPC_MERGE will be nice. There are still some magic numbers used in the driver (SICR_SIM_CODEC8, SICR_GENCLK, etc..) that should be defined in mpc52xx_psc.h.
Dragos _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-embedded mailing list Linuxppc-embedded@ozlabs.org https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-embedded
