Re: [PATCH 2/3] i2c-mpc: add support for the MPC512x processors from Freescale

2010-01-26 Thread Ben Dooks 
On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 04:15:09PM +0100, Wolfram Sang wrote:

   -static void __devinit mpc_i2c_setclock_52xx(struct device_node *node,
   -struct mpc_i2c *i2c,
   -u32 clock, u32 prescaler)
   +static void __devinit mpc_i2c_setup_52xx(struct device_node *node,
   + struct mpc_i2c *i2c,
   + u32 clock, u32 prescaler)
{
int ret, fdr;

   +if (clock == -1) {
   
   Could we use 0 for 'no_clock'? This would make the above statement simply
  
  0 is already used to maintain backward compatibility setting a safe
  divider.
 
 Ah, now I see:
 
 'clock == -1' means 'preserve clocks' (and is checked here in 
 mpc_i2c_setup_52xx())
 'clock ==  0' means 'safe divider' (and is checked in mpc_i2c_get_fdr_52xx())

hmm, sounds like a job for a  #define or similar.
 
 This is not a beauty ;)
 
 What about adding a flags variable to the setup-functions?
 
 Regards,
 
Wolfram
 
 -- 
 Pengutronix e.K.   | Wolfram Sang|
 Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/  |



-- 
Ben (b...@fluff.org, http://www.fluff.org/)

  'a smiley only costs 4 bytes'
___
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev

Re: [PATCH 2/3] i2c-mpc: add support for the MPC512x processors from Freescale

2010-01-26 Thread Wolfgang Grandegger 
Ben Dooks wrote:
 On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 04:15:09PM +0100, Wolfram Sang wrote:
  
 -static void __devinit mpc_i2c_setclock_52xx(struct device_node *node,
 - struct mpc_i2c *i2c,
 - u32 clock, u32 prescaler)
 +static void __devinit mpc_i2c_setup_52xx(struct device_node *node,
 +  struct mpc_i2c *i2c,
 +  u32 clock, u32 prescaler)
  {
   int ret, fdr;
  
 + if (clock == -1) {
 Could we use 0 for 'no_clock'? This would make the above statement simply
 0 is already used to maintain backward compatibility setting a safe
 divider.
 Ah, now I see:

 'clock == -1' means 'preserve clocks' (and is checked here in 
 mpc_i2c_setup_52xx())
 'clock ==  0' means 'safe divider' (and is checked in mpc_i2c_get_fdr_52xx())
 
 hmm, sounds like a job for a  #define or similar.

See v2 of this patch.

Wolfgang.
___
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev

[PATCH 2/3] i2c-mpc: add support for the MPC512x processors from Freescale

2010-01-25 Thread Wolfgang Grandegger 
From: Wolfgang Grandegger w...@denx.de

The setclock initialization functions have been renamed to setup
because I2C interrupts must be enabled for the MPC512x. This requires
to handle fsl,preserve-clocking in a slighly different way. Also,
the old settings are now reported calling dev_dbg(). For the MPC512x
the clock setup function of the MPC52xx can be re-used.

Signed-off-by: Wolfgang Grandegger w...@denx.de
---
 drivers/i2c/busses/Kconfig   |9 ++--
 drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-mpc.c |  122 ++
 2 files changed, 93 insertions(+), 38 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/Kconfig b/drivers/i2c/busses/Kconfig
index 5f318ce..f481f30 100644
--- a/drivers/i2c/busses/Kconfig
+++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/Kconfig
@@ -418,13 +418,14 @@ config I2C_IXP2000
  instead.
 
 config I2C_MPC
-   tristate MPC107/824x/85xx/52xx/86xx
+   tristate MPC107/824x/85xx/512x/52xx/86xx
depends on PPC32
help
  If you say yes to this option, support will be included for the
- built-in I2C interface on the MPC107/Tsi107/MPC8240/MPC8245 and
- MPC85xx/MPC8641 family processors. The driver may also work on 52xx
- family processors, though interrupts are known not to work.
+ built-in I2C interface on the MPC107/Tsi107/MPC8240/MPC8245,
+ MPC85xx/MPC8641 and MPC512x family processors. The driver may
+ also work on 52xx family processors, though interrupts are known
+ not to work.
 
  This driver can also be built as a module.  If so, the module
  will be called i2c-mpc.
diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-mpc.c b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-mpc.c
index 2cb864e..70c3e5d 100644
--- a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-mpc.c
+++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-mpc.c
@@ -67,9 +67,8 @@ struct mpc_i2c_divider {
 };
 
 struct mpc_i2c_data {
-   void (*setclock)(struct device_node *node,
-struct mpc_i2c *i2c,
-u32 clock, u32 prescaler);
+   void (*setup)(struct device_node *node, struct mpc_i2c *i2c,
+ u32 clock, u32 prescaler);
u32 prescaler;
 };
 
@@ -164,7 +163,7 @@ static int i2c_wait(struct mpc_i2c *i2c, unsigned timeout, 
int writing)
return 0;
 }
 
-#ifdef CONFIG_PPC_MPC52xx
+#if defined(CONFIG_PPC_MPC52xx) || defined(CONFIG_PPC_MPC512x)
 static const struct __devinitdata mpc_i2c_divider mpc_i2c_dividers_52xx[] = {
{20, 0x20}, {22, 0x21}, {24, 0x22}, {26, 0x23},
{28, 0x24}, {30, 0x01}, {32, 0x25}, {34, 0x02},
@@ -216,12 +215,18 @@ static int __devinit mpc_i2c_get_fdr_52xx(struct 
device_node *node, u32 clock,
return div ? (int)div-fdr : -EINVAL;
 }
 
-static void __devinit mpc_i2c_setclock_52xx(struct device_node *node,
-   struct mpc_i2c *i2c,
-   u32 clock, u32 prescaler)
+static void __devinit mpc_i2c_setup_52xx(struct device_node *node,
+struct mpc_i2c *i2c,
+u32 clock, u32 prescaler)
 {
int ret, fdr;
 
+   if (clock == -1) {
+   dev_dbg(i2c-dev, using fdr %d\n,
+   readb(i2c-base + MPC_I2C_FDR));
+   return; /* preserve clocking */
+   }
+
ret = mpc_i2c_get_fdr_52xx(node, clock, prescaler);
fdr = (ret = 0) ? ret : 0x3f; /* backward compatibility */
 
@@ -230,13 +235,50 @@ static void __devinit mpc_i2c_setclock_52xx(struct 
device_node *node,
if (ret = 0)
dev_info(i2c-dev, clock %d Hz (fdr=%d)\n, clock, fdr);
 }
-#else /* !CONFIG_PPC_MPC52xx */
-static void __devinit mpc_i2c_setclock_52xx(struct device_node *node,
-   struct mpc_i2c *i2c,
-   u32 clock, u32 prescaler)
+#else /* !(CONFIG_PPC_MPC52xx || CONFIG_PPC_MPC512x) */
+static void __devinit mpc_i2c_setup_52xx(struct device_node *node,
+struct mpc_i2c *i2c,
+u32 clock, u32 prescaler)
+{
+}
+#endif /* CONFIG_PPC_MPC52xx || CONFIG_PPC_MPC512x */
+
+#ifdef CONFIG_PPC_MPC512x
+static void __devinit mpc_i2c_setup_512x(struct device_node *node,
+struct mpc_i2c *i2c,
+u32 clock, u32 prescaler)
+{
+   struct device_node *node_ctrl;
+   void __iomem *ctrl;
+   const u32 *pval;
+   u32 idx;
+
+   /* Enable I2C interrupts for mpc5121 */
+   node_ctrl = of_find_compatible_node(NULL, NULL,
+   fsl,mpc5121-i2c-ctrl);
+   if (node_ctrl) {
+   ctrl = of_iomap(node_ctrl, 0);
+   if (ctrl) {
+
+   /* Interrupt enable bits for i2c-0/1/2: bit 24/26/28 */
+   pval = of_get_property(node, reg, NULL);
+   idx = (*pval  0xff)

Re: [PATCH 2/3] i2c-mpc: add support for the MPC512x processors from Freescale

2010-01-25 Thread Wolfram Sang 

Hi Wolfgang,

On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 09:27:08AM +0100, Wolfgang Grandegger wrote:
 From: Wolfgang Grandegger w...@denx.de
 
 The setclock initialization functions have been renamed to setup
 because I2C interrupts must be enabled for the MPC512x. This requires
 to handle fsl,preserve-clocking in a slighly different way. Also,
 the old settings are now reported calling dev_dbg(). For the MPC512x
 the clock setup function of the MPC52xx can be re-used.
 
 Signed-off-by: Wolfgang Grandegger w...@denx.de
 ---
  drivers/i2c/busses/Kconfig   |9 ++--
  drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-mpc.c |  122 
 ++
  2 files changed, 93 insertions(+), 38 deletions(-)
 
 diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/Kconfig b/drivers/i2c/busses/Kconfig
 index 5f318ce..f481f30 100644
 --- a/drivers/i2c/busses/Kconfig
 +++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/Kconfig
 @@ -418,13 +418,14 @@ config I2C_IXP2000
 instead.
  
  config I2C_MPC
 - tristate MPC107/824x/85xx/52xx/86xx
 + tristate MPC107/824x/85xx/512x/52xx/86xx
   depends on PPC32
   help
 If you say yes to this option, support will be included for the
 -   built-in I2C interface on the MPC107/Tsi107/MPC8240/MPC8245 and
 -   MPC85xx/MPC8641 family processors. The driver may also work on 52xx
 -   family processors, though interrupts are known not to work.
 +   built-in I2C interface on the MPC107/Tsi107/MPC8240/MPC8245,
 +   MPC85xx/MPC8641 and MPC512x family processors. The driver may
 +   also work on 52xx family processors, though interrupts are known
 +   not to work.

Opinion poll: Can we remove the may work sentence while we are here? It has
worked fine for years. BTW, which interrupts are meant here (from I2C slaves?
interrupts of the controller?)?

  
 This driver can also be built as a module.  If so, the module
 will be called i2c-mpc.
 diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-mpc.c b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-mpc.c
 index 2cb864e..70c3e5d 100644
 --- a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-mpc.c
 +++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-mpc.c
 @@ -67,9 +67,8 @@ struct mpc_i2c_divider {
  };
  
  struct mpc_i2c_data {
 - void (*setclock)(struct device_node *node,
 -  struct mpc_i2c *i2c,
 -  u32 clock, u32 prescaler);
 + void (*setup)(struct device_node *node, struct mpc_i2c *i2c,
 +   u32 clock, u32 prescaler);
   u32 prescaler;
  };
  
 @@ -164,7 +163,7 @@ static int i2c_wait(struct mpc_i2c *i2c, unsigned 
 timeout, int writing)
   return 0;
  }
  
 -#ifdef CONFIG_PPC_MPC52xx
 +#if defined(CONFIG_PPC_MPC52xx) || defined(CONFIG_PPC_MPC512x)
  static const struct __devinitdata mpc_i2c_divider mpc_i2c_dividers_52xx[] = {
   {20, 0x20}, {22, 0x21}, {24, 0x22}, {26, 0x23},
   {28, 0x24}, {30, 0x01}, {32, 0x25}, {34, 0x02},
 @@ -216,12 +215,18 @@ static int __devinit mpc_i2c_get_fdr_52xx(struct 
 device_node *node, u32 clock,
   return div ? (int)div-fdr : -EINVAL;
  }
  
 -static void __devinit mpc_i2c_setclock_52xx(struct device_node *node,
 - struct mpc_i2c *i2c,
 - u32 clock, u32 prescaler)
 +static void __devinit mpc_i2c_setup_52xx(struct device_node *node,
 +  struct mpc_i2c *i2c,
 +  u32 clock, u32 prescaler)
  {
   int ret, fdr;
  
 + if (clock == -1) {

Could we use 0 for 'no_clock'? This would make the above statement simply

if (!clock)

and saves us using -1 with a u32.

 + dev_dbg(i2c-dev, using fdr %d\n,
 + readb(i2c-base + MPC_I2C_FDR));
 + return; /* preserve clocking */
 + }
 +
   ret = mpc_i2c_get_fdr_52xx(node, clock, prescaler);
   fdr = (ret = 0) ? ret : 0x3f; /* backward compatibility */
  
 @@ -230,13 +235,50 @@ static void __devinit mpc_i2c_setclock_52xx(struct 
 device_node *node,
   if (ret = 0)
   dev_info(i2c-dev, clock %d Hz (fdr=%d)\n, clock, fdr);
  }
 -#else /* !CONFIG_PPC_MPC52xx */
 -static void __devinit mpc_i2c_setclock_52xx(struct device_node *node,
 - struct mpc_i2c *i2c,
 - u32 clock, u32 prescaler)
 +#else /* !(CONFIG_PPC_MPC52xx || CONFIG_PPC_MPC512x) */
 +static void __devinit mpc_i2c_setup_52xx(struct device_node *node,
 +  struct mpc_i2c *i2c,
 +  u32 clock, u32 prescaler)
 +{
 +}
 +#endif /* CONFIG_PPC_MPC52xx || CONFIG_PPC_MPC512x */
 +
 +#ifdef CONFIG_PPC_MPC512x
 +static void __devinit mpc_i2c_setup_512x(struct device_node *node,
 +  struct mpc_i2c *i2c,
 +  u32 clock, u32 prescaler)
 +{
 + struct device_node *node_ctrl;
 + void __iomem *ctrl;
 + const u32 *pval;
 + u32 idx;
 +
 + /* Enable I2C interrupts for

Re: [PATCH 2/3] i2c-mpc: add support for the MPC512x processors from Freescale

2010-01-25 Thread Wolfgang Grandegger 
Hi Wolfram,

Wolfram Sang wrote:
 Hi Wolfgang,
 
 On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 09:27:08AM +0100, Wolfgang Grandegger wrote:
 From: Wolfgang Grandegger w...@denx.de

 The setclock initialization functions have been renamed to setup
 because I2C interrupts must be enabled for the MPC512x. This requires
 to handle fsl,preserve-clocking in a slighly different way. Also,
 the old settings are now reported calling dev_dbg(). For the MPC512x
 the clock setup function of the MPC52xx can be re-used.

 Signed-off-by: Wolfgang Grandegger w...@denx.de
 ---
  drivers/i2c/busses/Kconfig   |9 ++--
  drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-mpc.c |  122 
 ++
  2 files changed, 93 insertions(+), 38 deletions(-)

 diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/Kconfig b/drivers/i2c/busses/Kconfig
 index 5f318ce..f481f30 100644
 --- a/drivers/i2c/busses/Kconfig
 +++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/Kconfig
 @@ -418,13 +418,14 @@ config I2C_IXP2000
instead.
  
  config I2C_MPC
 -tristate MPC107/824x/85xx/52xx/86xx
 +tristate MPC107/824x/85xx/512x/52xx/86xx
  depends on PPC32
  help
If you say yes to this option, support will be included for the
 -  built-in I2C interface on the MPC107/Tsi107/MPC8240/MPC8245 and
 -  MPC85xx/MPC8641 family processors. The driver may also work on 52xx
 -  family processors, though interrupts are known not to work.
 +  built-in I2C interface on the MPC107/Tsi107/MPC8240/MPC8245,
 +  MPC85xx/MPC8641 and MPC512x family processors. The driver may
 +  also work on 52xx family processors, though interrupts are known
 +  not to work.
 
 Opinion poll: Can we remove the may work sentence while we are here? It has
 worked fine for years. BTW, which interrupts are meant here (from I2C slaves?
 interrupts of the controller?)?

I first wanted to remove this sentence but as I was not sure what it's
exact meaning... Anyway, it's confusing and I would remove it.

This driver can also be built as a module.  If so, the module
will be called i2c-mpc.
 diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-mpc.c b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-mpc.c
 index 2cb864e..70c3e5d 100644
 --- a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-mpc.c
 +++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-mpc.c
 @@ -67,9 +67,8 @@ struct mpc_i2c_divider {
  };
  
  struct mpc_i2c_data {
 -void (*setclock)(struct device_node *node,
 - struct mpc_i2c *i2c,
 - u32 clock, u32 prescaler);
 +void (*setup)(struct device_node *node, struct mpc_i2c *i2c,
 +  u32 clock, u32 prescaler);
  u32 prescaler;
  };
  
 @@ -164,7 +163,7 @@ static int i2c_wait(struct mpc_i2c *i2c, unsigned 
 timeout, int writing)
  return 0;
  }
  
 -#ifdef CONFIG_PPC_MPC52xx
 +#if defined(CONFIG_PPC_MPC52xx) || defined(CONFIG_PPC_MPC512x)
  static const struct __devinitdata mpc_i2c_divider mpc_i2c_dividers_52xx[] = 
 {
  {20, 0x20}, {22, 0x21}, {24, 0x22}, {26, 0x23},
  {28, 0x24}, {30, 0x01}, {32, 0x25}, {34, 0x02},
 @@ -216,12 +215,18 @@ static int __devinit mpc_i2c_get_fdr_52xx(struct 
 device_node *node, u32 clock,
  return div ? (int)div-fdr : -EINVAL;
  }
  
 -static void __devinit mpc_i2c_setclock_52xx(struct device_node *node,
 -struct mpc_i2c *i2c,
 -u32 clock, u32 prescaler)
 +static void __devinit mpc_i2c_setup_52xx(struct device_node *node,
 + struct mpc_i2c *i2c,
 + u32 clock, u32 prescaler)
  {
  int ret, fdr;
  
 +if (clock == -1) {
 
 Could we use 0 for 'no_clock'? This would make the above statement simply

0 is already used to maintain backward compatibility setting a safe
divider.

   if (!clock)
 
 and saves us using -1 with a u32.
 
 +dev_dbg(i2c-dev, using fdr %d\n,
 +readb(i2c-base + MPC_I2C_FDR));
 +return; /* preserve clocking */
 +}
 +
  ret = mpc_i2c_get_fdr_52xx(node, clock, prescaler);
  fdr = (ret = 0) ? ret : 0x3f; /* backward compatibility */
  
 @@ -230,13 +235,50 @@ static void __devinit mpc_i2c_setclock_52xx(struct 
 device_node *node,
  if (ret = 0)
  dev_info(i2c-dev, clock %d Hz (fdr=%d)\n, clock, fdr);
  }
 -#else /* !CONFIG_PPC_MPC52xx */
 -static void __devinit mpc_i2c_setclock_52xx(struct device_node *node,
 -struct mpc_i2c *i2c,
 -u32 clock, u32 prescaler)
 +#else /* !(CONFIG_PPC_MPC52xx || CONFIG_PPC_MPC512x) */
 +static void __devinit mpc_i2c_setup_52xx(struct device_node *node,
 + struct mpc_i2c *i2c,
 + u32 clock, u32 prescaler)
 +{
 +}
 +#endif /* CONFIG_PPC_MPC52xx || CONFIG_PPC_MPC512x */
 +
 +#ifdef CONFIG_PPC_MPC512x
 +static void __devinit mpc_i2c_setup_512x(struct device_node *node,
 + struct mpc_i2c *i2c,
 +

Re: [PATCH 2/3] i2c-mpc: add support for the MPC512x processors from Freescale

2010-01-25 Thread Wolfram Sang 
   
  -static void __devinit mpc_i2c_setclock_52xx(struct device_node *node,
  -  struct mpc_i2c *i2c,
  -  u32 clock, u32 prescaler)
  +static void __devinit mpc_i2c_setup_52xx(struct device_node *node,
  +   struct mpc_i2c *i2c,
  +   u32 clock, u32 prescaler)
   {
 int ret, fdr;
   
  +  if (clock == -1) {
  
  Could we use 0 for 'no_clock'? This would make the above statement simply
 
 0 is already used to maintain backward compatibility setting a safe
 divider.

Ah, now I see:

'clock == -1' means 'preserve clocks' (and is checked here in 
mpc_i2c_setup_52xx())
'clock ==  0' means 'safe divider' (and is checked in mpc_i2c_get_fdr_52xx())

This is not a beauty ;)

What about adding a flags variable to the setup-functions?

Regards,

   Wolfram

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.   | Wolfram Sang|
Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/  |


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
___
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev

Re: [PATCH 2/3] i2c-mpc: add support for the MPC512x processors from Freescale

2010-01-25 Thread Wolfgang Grandegger 
Wolfram Sang wrote:
  
 -static void __devinit mpc_i2c_setclock_52xx(struct device_node *node,
 -  struct mpc_i2c *i2c,
 -  u32 clock, u32 prescaler)
 +static void __devinit mpc_i2c_setup_52xx(struct device_node *node,
 +   struct mpc_i2c *i2c,
 +   u32 clock, u32 prescaler)
  {
int ret, fdr;
  
 +  if (clock == -1) {
 Could we use 0 for 'no_clock'? This would make the above statement simply
 0 is already used to maintain backward compatibility setting a safe
 divider.
 
 Ah, now I see:
 
 'clock == -1' means 'preserve clocks' (and is checked here in 
 mpc_i2c_setup_52xx())

Yes, this is now necessary because setup does not just do clock settings.

 'clock ==  0' means 'safe divider' (and is checked in mpc_i2c_get_fdr_52xx())

This is for compatibility with old DTS files and last time it was tricky
 to get that right and therefore...

 This is not a beauty ;)
 
 What about adding a flags variable to the setup-functions?

.. I hesitate to make bigger changes to the code flow, which the
introduction of a flags variable would required. Also it seems to be
overkill to me. I will have a closer look, though. At a minimum I will
replace -1 with MPC_I2C_PRESERVE_CLOCK.

Wolfgang.
___
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev

Re: [PATCH 2/3] i2c-mpc: add support for the MPC512x processors from Freescale

2010-01-25 Thread Wolfram Sang 
 overkill to me. I will have a closer look, though. At a minimum I will
 replace -1 with MPC_I2C_PRESERVE_CLOCK.

Might be also an idea to define it with ~0 (clock is still unsigned). If
possible, the code checking for those two cases (0 and -1) should be close
together. That could be a compromise until more quirks are needed ;)

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.   | Wolfram Sang|
Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/  |


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
___
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev

Re: [PATCH 2/3] i2c-mpc: add support for the MPC512x processors from Freescale

2010-01-25 Thread Wolfgang Grandegger 
Wolfram Sang wrote:
 overkill to me. I will have a closer look, though. At a minimum I will
 replace -1 with MPC_I2C_PRESERVE_CLOCK.
 
 Might be also an idea to define it with ~0 (clock is still unsigned). If
 possible, the code checking for those two cases (0 and -1) should be close
 together. That could be a compromise until more quirks are needed ;)

I just sent v2. Hope it's OK now.

Wolfgang.

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

Re: [PATCH 2/3] i2c-mpc: add support for the MPC512x processors from Freescale

2010-01-25 Thread Wolfram Sang 
 I just sent v2. Hope it's OK now.

Thanks, will check tomorrow.

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.   | Wolfram Sang|
Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/  |


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
___
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev