On Mon, 2004-03-15 at 20:38, Tom Rini wrote: > Actually, I was thinking that having an extra nop there on the !SMP && > !(745x && MPC107) case wouldn't hurt much / at all, and having this > feature bit be done unconditionally. But in cpu_setup_6xx.S we would > compare the host bridge vendor / device ID to that of an mpc107. Or am > I not thinking right, and doing that comparison at that time would be a > bad idea? If so, I can live with it being an unconditional option, iff > it's only required when MPC10X_STORE_GATHERING is enabled.
The only problem I see is that in cpu_setup_6xx.S we can't yet do the config cycles to tell that it is an MPC107. Luckily, all MPC10x boards that I know of require an explicit platform selection option. I made my patch depend on CONFIG_MPC10X_BRIDGE, instead of CONFIG_MPC10X_STORE_GATHERING, because I'm in the middle of porting other MPC107 drivers from kernel 2.4 to 2.6. An extra nop won't hurt, but there is a performance cost to _PAGE_COHERENT which we should avoid unless necessary. - Adrian Cox http://www.humboldt.co.uk/ ** Sent via the linuxppc-embedded mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/
