Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > On Thu, 2007-09-20 at 12:29 -0500, Josh Boyer wrote: >> On Thu, 20 Sep 2007 12:25:06 -0500 >> Olof Johansson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >>> On Thu, Sep 20, 2007 at 08:56:32PM +0400, Valentine Barshak wrote: >>>> I was thinking about it. Looks like it's the best place, but the code that >>>> actually calls setup_cpu is under ifdef CONFIG_PPC64, while lots of >>>> cpu_setup functions are defined for ppc32 processors. >>>> Is it OK to remove this ifdef, or should I do CONFIG_PPC64 || CONFIG_44x? >>> Sounds like something that went wrong at the merge of ppc and ppc64. >>> >>> Take out the ifdef, even if there's fallout we should deal with it >>> instead of adding more complex ifdefs. >> Yeah. Looks like BenH did this in commit: >> >> 42c4aaadb737e0e672b3fb86b2c41ff59f0fb8bc >> >> Ben, any reason you ifdef'd it for ppc64? > > I'll have to check on monday what's up there, but isn't setup_cpu called > from a different place on 32 bits? There are some subtle difference with > the way the cpu feature stuff is initialized /done between 32 and 64 > bits that we haven't fully reconciled yet. > > Ben. >
From what I've seen, setup_cpu is never called for BOOKE. Currently It's called from cputable.c for PPC64 and from head_32.S for 6xx. Thanks, Valentine. > _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
