On Jan 13, 2010, at 9:32 PM, Liu Yu wrote: > Since 1.0 and 2.0 use different snum table, > we fixup the snum value according to SPRN_SVR. > > Signed-off-by: Liu Yu <[email protected]> > --- > v2: > change to use macro SVR_SOC_VER and IS_SVR_REV > > board/freescale/mpc8569mds/mpc8569mds.c | 15 +++++++++++++++ > 1 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/board/freescale/mpc8569mds/mpc8569mds.c > b/board/freescale/mpc8569mds/mpc8569mds.c > index 56854ca..9d190eb 100644 > --- a/board/freescale/mpc8569mds/mpc8569mds.c > +++ b/board/freescale/mpc8569mds/mpc8569mds.c > @@ -524,6 +524,20 @@ static void fdt_board_fixup_qe_usb(void *blob, bd_t *bd) > clrbits_8(&bcsr[17], BCSR17_nUSBEN); > } > > +static void fdt_board_fixup_qe_snum(void *blob, bd_t *bd) > +{ > + unsigned int svr; > + > + svr = mfspr(SPRN_SVR); > + if (SVR_SOC_VER(svr) == SVR_8569_E && IS_SVR_REV(svr, 1, 0)) { > + do_fixup_by_compat_u32(blob, "fsl,qe", > + "fsl,qe-num-snums", 46, 1); > + } else { > + do_fixup_by_compat_u32(blob, "fsl,qe", > + "fsl,qe-num-snums", 76, 1); > + } > +} > +
Sorry, I just noticed that you did this in board code. Can we do this in ft_cpu_setup() instead right after we call ft_qe_setup() ? > #ifdef CONFIG_PCIE1 > static struct pci_controller pcie1_hose; > #endif /* CONFIG_PCIE1 */ > @@ -634,5 +648,6 @@ void ft_board_setup(void *blob, bd_t *bd) > fdt_board_fixup_esdhc(blob, bd); > fdt_board_fixup_qe_uart(blob, bd); > fdt_board_fixup_qe_usb(blob, bd); > + fdt_board_fixup_qe_snum(blob, bd); > } > #endif > -- > 1.6.4 - k _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list [email protected] http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
