Re: [PATCH] fsl_soc: Fix get_immrbase() to use ranges, rather than reg.

2008-01-18 Thread Kumar Gala 
On Mon, 14 Jan 2008, Scott Wood wrote:

 The reg property in fsl soc nodes should be removed.

 Signed-off-by: Scott Wood [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 ---
  arch/powerpc/sysdev/fsl_soc.c |   14 +++---
  1 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

applied.  (dropped the size == 12 check).


- k
___
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org
https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev

Re: [PATCH] fsl_soc: Fix get_immrbase() to use ranges, rather than reg.

2008-01-15 Thread Scott Wood 
On Mon, Jan 14, 2008 at 08:37:27PM -0600, Kumar Gala wrote:
 diff --git a/arch/powerpc/sysdev/fsl_soc.c b/arch/powerpc/sysdev/ 
 fsl_soc.c
 index 3ace747..7502e03 100644
 --- a/arch/powerpc/sysdev/fsl_soc.c
 +++ b/arch/powerpc/sysdev/fsl_soc.c
 @@ -54,10 +54,18 @@ phys_addr_t get_immrbase(void)
  soc = of_find_node_by_type(NULL, soc);
  if (soc) {
  int size;
 -const void *prop = of_get_property(soc, reg, size);
 +u32 naddr;
 +const u32 *prop = of_get_property(soc, #address-cells, 
 size);
 +
 +if (prop  size == 4)
 +naddr = *prop;
 +else
 +naddr = 2;
 
 Why default to two?

Because that's what the OF spec says the default is?

 +prop = of_get_property(soc, ranges, size);
 +if (prop  size == 12)
 +immrbase = of_translate_address(soc, prop + naddr);

Grr, I thought I removed the size == 12 check...

 -if (prop)
 -immrbase = of_translate_address(soc, prop);
 
 why not make your code an else case if we don't have reg?

Why?

 or something like, than we don't have to worry about adjust anything,  
 and if you don't have any children its kinda a pointless device tree :)

It's not pointless, it's just incomplete.

   if (soc) {
   struct device_node *child = of_get_next_child(soc, NULL);
   if (child) {
   const void *prop = of_get_property(soc, ranges, 
   NULL);
   if (prop)
   immrbase = of_translate_address(child, prop);
   of_node_put(child);
   }
   of_node_put(soc);
   }

Why go out of our way to fail on a childless soc node?

-Scott
___
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org
https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev

Re: [PATCH] fsl_soc: Fix get_immrbase() to use ranges, rather than reg.

2008-01-15 Thread Kumar Gala 

On Jan 15, 2008, at 10:40 AM, Scott Wood wrote:

 On Mon, Jan 14, 2008 at 08:37:27PM -0600, Kumar Gala wrote:
 diff --git a/arch/powerpc/sysdev/fsl_soc.c b/arch/powerpc/sysdev/
 fsl_soc.c
 index 3ace747..7502e03 100644
 --- a/arch/powerpc/sysdev/fsl_soc.c
 +++ b/arch/powerpc/sysdev/fsl_soc.c
 @@ -54,10 +54,18 @@ phys_addr_t get_immrbase(void)
 soc = of_find_node_by_type(NULL, soc);
 if (soc) {
 int size;
 -   const void *prop = of_get_property(soc, reg, size);
 +   u32 naddr;
 +   const u32 *prop = of_get_property(soc, #address-cells,
 size);
 +
 +   if (prop  size == 4)
 +   naddr = *prop;
 +   else
 +   naddr = 2;

 Why default to two?

 Because that's what the OF spec says the default is?

fair.

 +   prop = of_get_property(soc, ranges, size);
 +   if (prop  size == 12)
 +   immrbase = of_translate_address(soc, prop + naddr);

 Grr, I thought I removed the size == 12 check...

 -   if (prop)
 -   immrbase = of_translate_address(soc, prop);

 why not make your code an else case if we don't have reg?

 Why?

I agree (had to think about it a bit more).

 or something like, than we don't have to worry about adjust anything,
 and if you don't have any children its kinda a pointless device  
 tree :)

 It's not pointless, it's just incomplete.

  if (soc) {
  struct device_node *child = of_get_next_child(soc, NULL);
  if (child) {
  const void *prop = of_get_property(soc, ranges,
  NULL);
  if (prop)
  immrbase = of_translate_address(child, prop);
  of_node_put(child);
  }
  of_node_put(soc);
  }

 Why go out of our way to fail on a childless soc node?

do we see any case in which we'd have a childless soc node?

I'm just concerned about make sure this works for all the various  
cases of #address-cells and #size-cells.

- k
___
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org
https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev

[PATCH] fsl_soc: Fix get_immrbase() to use ranges, rather than reg.

2008-01-14 Thread Scott Wood 
The reg property in fsl soc nodes should be removed.

Signed-off-by: Scott Wood [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
 arch/powerpc/sysdev/fsl_soc.c |   14 +++---
 1 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/powerpc/sysdev/fsl_soc.c b/arch/powerpc/sysdev/fsl_soc.c
index 3ace747..7502e03 100644
--- a/arch/powerpc/sysdev/fsl_soc.c
+++ b/arch/powerpc/sysdev/fsl_soc.c
@@ -54,10 +54,18 @@ phys_addr_t get_immrbase(void)
soc = of_find_node_by_type(NULL, soc);
if (soc) {
int size;
-   const void *prop = of_get_property(soc, reg, size);
+   u32 naddr;
+   const u32 *prop = of_get_property(soc, #address-cells, size);
+
+   if (prop  size == 4)
+   naddr = *prop;
+   else
+   naddr = 2;
+
+   prop = of_get_property(soc, ranges, size);
+   if (prop  size == 12)
+   immrbase = of_translate_address(soc, prop + naddr);
 
-   if (prop)
-   immrbase = of_translate_address(soc, prop);
of_node_put(soc);
}
 
-- 
1.5.3
___
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org
https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev

Re: [PATCH] fsl_soc: Fix get_immrbase() to use ranges, rather than reg.

2008-01-14 Thread Kumar Gala 

On Jan 14, 2008, at 10:29 AM, Scott Wood wrote:

 The reg property in fsl soc nodes should be removed.

 Signed-off-by: Scott Wood [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 ---
 arch/powerpc/sysdev/fsl_soc.c |   14 +++---
 1 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

 diff --git a/arch/powerpc/sysdev/fsl_soc.c b/arch/powerpc/sysdev/ 
 fsl_soc.c
 index 3ace747..7502e03 100644
 --- a/arch/powerpc/sysdev/fsl_soc.c
 +++ b/arch/powerpc/sysdev/fsl_soc.c
 @@ -54,10 +54,18 @@ phys_addr_t get_immrbase(void)
   soc = of_find_node_by_type(NULL, soc);
   if (soc) {
   int size;
 - const void *prop = of_get_property(soc, reg, size);
 + u32 naddr;
 + const u32 *prop = of_get_property(soc, #address-cells, size);
 +
 + if (prop  size == 4)
 + naddr = *prop;
 + else
 + naddr = 2;

Why default to two?


 +
 + prop = of_get_property(soc, ranges, size);
 + if (prop  size == 12)
 + immrbase = of_translate_address(soc, prop + naddr);

 - if (prop)
 - immrbase = of_translate_address(soc, prop);

why not make your code an else case if we don't have reg?


   of_node_put(soc);
   }

or something like, than we don't have to worry about adjust anything,  
and if you don't have any children its kinda a pointless device tree :)

if (soc) {
struct device_node *child = of_get_next_child(soc, NULL);
if (child) {
const void *prop = of_get_property(soc, ranges, NULL);
if (prop)
immrbase = of_translate_address(child, prop);
of_node_put(child);
}
of_node_put(soc);
}

- k
___
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org
https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev

[PATCH] fsl_soc: Fix get_immrbase() to use ranges, rather than reg.

2008-01-11 Thread Scott Wood 
The reg property in fsl soc nodes should be removed.

Signed-off-by: Scott Wood [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
 arch/powerpc/sysdev/fsl_soc.c |   14 +++---
 1 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/powerpc/sysdev/fsl_soc.c b/arch/powerpc/sysdev/fsl_soc.c
index 3ace747..7502e03 100644
--- a/arch/powerpc/sysdev/fsl_soc.c
+++ b/arch/powerpc/sysdev/fsl_soc.c
@@ -54,10 +54,18 @@ phys_addr_t get_immrbase(void)
soc = of_find_node_by_type(NULL, soc);
if (soc) {
int size;
-   const void *prop = of_get_property(soc, reg, size);
+   u32 naddr;
+   const u32 *prop = of_get_property(soc, #address-cells, size);
+
+   if (prop  size == 4)
+   naddr = *prop;
+   else
+   naddr = 2;
+
+   prop = of_get_property(soc, ranges, size);
+   if (prop)
+   immrbase = of_translate_address(soc, prop + naddr);
 
-   if (prop)
-   immrbase = of_translate_address(soc, prop);
of_node_put(soc);
}
 
-- 
1.5.3
___
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org
https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev