On 06/29/2012 10:39 AM, Tabi Timur-B04825 wrote: > On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 5:25 AM, Zhao Chenhui > <chenhui.z...@freescale.com> wrote: >> +static void mpc85xx_give_timebase(void) >> +{ >> + unsigned long flags; >> + >> + local_irq_save(flags); >> + >> + while (!tb_req) >> + barrier(); > > I think tb_req and tb_valid need to be 'volatile'.
No, barrier() and mb() take care of that. >> +static const struct of_device_id mpc85xx_smp_guts_ids[] = { >> + { .compatible = "fsl,mpc8572-guts", }, >> + { .compatible = "fsl,p1020-guts", }, >> + { .compatible = "fsl,p1021-guts", }, >> + { .compatible = "fsl,p1022-guts", }, >> + { .compatible = "fsl,p1023-guts", }, >> + { .compatible = "fsl,p2020-guts", }, >> + {}, >> +}; > > I wonder if it's possible to dynamically generate the compatible > string by using the SOC name? Where are you going to get the SoC name from? -Scott _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev