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
