On Fri, 29 Feb 2008 16:36:29 +0100
Stefan Roese <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Friday 29 February 2008, Josh Boyer wrote:
> > On Sat, 23 Feb 2008 22:08:01 +0100
> >
> > Stefan Roese <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Signed-off-by: Stefan Roese <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > ---
> > > And now the I2C device-types are removed. Sorry for the mail-flood.
> > >
> > > arch/powerpc/boot/dts/canyonlands.dts | 393
> > > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 files changed, 393 insertions(+), 0
> > > deletions(-)
> > > create mode 100644 arch/powerpc/boot/dts/canyonlands.dts
> > >
> > > diff --git a/arch/powerpc/boot/dts/canyonlands.dts
> > > b/arch/powerpc/boot/dts/canyonlands.dts new file mode 100644
> > > index 0000000..2aee74c
> > > --- /dev/null
> > > +++ b/arch/powerpc/boot/dts/canyonlands.dts
> >
> > [snip]
> >
> > > + MAL0: mcmal {
> > > + compatible = "ibm,mcmal-460ex", "ibm,mcmal2";
> > > + dcr-reg = <180 62>;
> > > + num-tx-chans = <2>;
> > > + num-rx-chans = <10>;
> > > + #address-cells = <0>;
> > > + #size-cells = <0>;
> > > + interrupt-parent = <&UIC2>;
> > > + interrupts = < /*TXEOB*/ 6 4
> > > + /*RXEOB*/ 7 4
> > > + /*SERR*/ 3 4
> >
> > This is odd. I have MAL SERR listed twice in the spec I have. This
> > assignment is there, and there's also one to UIC1 IRQ 0. Error in my
> > spec, or are both actually tied to the same interrupt line?
>
> Must be an error in the preliminary spec. I have the engineering docs from
> AMCC and here UIC1 IRQ0 is the external IRQ 2, which is used for PCI. So this
> is still wrong in the current dts version. I'll send an updated version
> probably tomorrow.
OK. That doesn't surprise me actually.
> > > + /*TXDE*/ 4 4
> > > + /*RXDE*/ 5 4>;
> > > + };
> > >
> > > + UART0: [EMAIL PROTECTED] {
> > > + device_type = "serial";
> > > + compatible = "ns16550";
> > > + reg = <ef600300 8>;
> > > + virtual-reg = <ef600300>;
> > > + clock-frequency = <0>; /* Filled in by U-Boot */
> > > + current-speed = <0>; /* Filled in by U-Boot */
> > > + interrupt-parent = <&UIC1>;
> > > + interrupts = <1 4>;
> >
> > Should this be <2 4> or is the spec I have wrong?
>
> Again, your documentation is incorrect. Took me 1/2 a day to figure this out
> myself.
I sort of figured that was the case. I didn't expect you to have sent
out patches that don't have a working console :).
josh
_______________________________________________
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org
https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
