> > +/* Check that the core has been initied and if not, do it */
> > +static int __init ppc4xx_pciex_check_core_init(struct device_node *np)
> > +{
> > + static int core_init;
> > + int count = -ENODEV;
> > +
> > + if (core_init++)
> > + return 0;
> > +
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_44x
> > + if (of_device_is_compatible(np, "ibm,plb-pciex-440speA"))
> > + ppc4xx_pciex_hwops = &ppc440speA_pcie_hwops;
> > + else if (of_device_is_compatible(np, "ibm,plb-pciex-440speB"))
> > + ppc4xx_pciex_hwops = &ppc440speB_pcie_hwops;
>
> We need some runtime detection of the 440SPe revision here. There are boards
> out there (e.g. AMCC Yucca) which can be equipped with both PPC
> revisions. :-(
Ah... crap ! Do you think we should put that in the boot wrapper and
fixup the device-tree or should we put it in the PCIe code proper ?
> > +#endif /* CONFIG_44x */
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_40x
> > + if (of_device_is_compatible(np, "ibm,plb-pciex-405ex"))
> > + ppc4xx_pciex_hwops = &ppc405ex_pcie_hwops;
> > +#endif
>
> Why those #ifdef's? Just code-size reasons, since 40x and 44x will most
> likely
> never be built into one image?
Code size... I know how keen embedded people are to keep their kernel
small and as of today, you can't build 40x and 44x support in the same
image, so I didn't want to be blamed for adding bloat in that case :-)
Ben.
_______________________________________________
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org
https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
