Re: [PATCH] [POWERPC] mpc5200: Switch mpc5200 dts files to dts-v1 format
On Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 2:43 AM, Sascha Hauer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Apr 18, 2008 at 09:10:04AM -0700, Grant Likely wrote:
Update dts files to current format
From: Grant Likely [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Signed-off-by: Grant Likely [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
arch/powerpc/boot/dts/cm5200.dts| 98 +++
arch/powerpc/boot/dts/lite5200.dts | 132
arch/powerpc/boot/dts/lite5200b.dts | 146
+--
arch/powerpc/boot/dts/motionpro.dts | 118 ++--
arch/powerpc/boot/dts/tqm5200.dts | 80 ++-
5 files changed, 286 insertions(+), 288 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/powerpc/boot/dts/cm5200.dts
b/arch/powerpc/boot/dts/cm5200.dts
index c6ca631..2f74cc4 100644
--- a/arch/powerpc/boot/dts/cm5200.dts
+++ b/arch/powerpc/boot/dts/cm5200.dts
@@ -10,11 +10,7 @@
* option) any later version.
*/
-/*
- * WARNING: Do not depend on this tree layout remaining static just yet.
- * The MPC5200 device tree conventions are still in flux
- * Keep an eye on the linuxppc-dev mailing list for more details
- */
+/dts-v1/;
/ {
model = schindler,cm5200;
@@ -29,10 +25,10 @@
PowerPC,[EMAIL PROTECTED] {
device_type = cpu;
reg = 0;
- d-cache-line-size = 20;
- i-cache-line-size = 20;
- d-cache-size = 4000; // L1, 16K
- i-cache-size = 4000; // L1, 16K
+ d-cache-line-size = 32;
+ i-cache-line-size = 32;
Has the standard number format changed to decimal lately? Otherwise this
looks wrong. There are more occurences of this in the other dts files.
Yes, that is the major change in v1 of the dts format. It uses C
style number format.
Cheers,
g.
--
Grant Likely, B.Sc., P.Eng.
Secret Lab Technologies Ltd.
___
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org
https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
Re: [PATCH] [POWERPC] mpc5200: Switch mpc5200 dts files to dts-v1 format
On Fri, Apr 18, 2008 at 09:10:04AM -0700, Grant Likely wrote: Update dts files to current format Is it somehow possible that this device tree stuff is *not* changed over and over again and break everything out there? When people have not even agreed on basic things like decimal vs. hex numbers, the whole idea should be developed out-of-tree, then stabilize and *then* be submitted to the Linux mainline. Is it also really necessary to change like gpt vs. timer and pic vs. interrupt-controller all the time? If you compare the last mainline kernels, each one got a fundamental change in the naming, each time breaking anyone who doesn't have his stuff in the mainline yet. Sorry, but this is simply annoying, and the whole the only thing we have to do is to define it once and be done then is crap. Robert -- Dipl.-Ing. Robert Schwebel | http://www.pengutronix.de Pengutronix - Linux Solutions for Science and Industry Handelsregister: Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 Hannoversche Str. 2, 31134 Hildesheim, Germany Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-9 ___ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
Re: [PATCH] [POWERPC] mpc5200: Switch mpc5200 dts files to dts-v1 format
On Sat, Apr 19, 2008 at 7:36 AM, Robert Schwebel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Fri, Apr 18, 2008 at 09:10:04AM -0700, Grant Likely wrote: Update dts files to current format Is it somehow possible that this device tree stuff is *not* changed over and over again and break everything out there? When people have not even agreed on basic things like decimal vs. hex numbers, the whole idea should be developed out-of-tree, then stabilize and *then* be submitted to the Linux mainline. Is it also really necessary to change like gpt vs. timer and pic vs. interrupt-controller all the time? If you compare the last mainline kernels, each one got a fundamental change in the naming, each time breaking anyone who doesn't have his stuff in the mainline yet. Sorry, but this is simply annoying, and the whole the only thing we have to do is to define it once and be done then is crap. Changing to dts-v1 does *not* break old stuff. It is just a source format change. Neither does the RFC patch for removing the fsl,mpc5200b- compatible strings. I have no intention of breaking older device trees. g. -- Grant Likely, B.Sc., P.Eng. Secret Lab Technologies Ltd. ___ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
Re: [PATCH] [POWERPC] mpc5200: Switch mpc5200 dts files to dts-v1 format
I wholeheartedly agree, although the difference between gpt and timer and pic vs interrupt-controller (actually interrupt-controller is meant to be a property of the interrupt controller, not a device type.. weird) was chosen because they did not conflict with what might be considered standard device_types with real OF (Forth, CIS) interfaces like read, write, ping, world-peace etc. However since Linux doesn't care about the interface provided by the firmware and only reads the tree, and real OF interfaces MIGHT need to be provided by these items on real OF firmwares, I don't see why they should not be used. A problem arises; how do you decide when you name something after what it is rather than the documentation acronym? What does the 5200B CDM turn into? The XLB arbiter module? What about the rest of the SIU? There really needs to be a standards committee for this, that has good experience with device trees and BSPs, and can work with the device vendors and board manufacturers (Freescale for example) directly, with them on the committee, who can give the docs a run though before any board ever hits the streets... -- Matt Sealey [EMAIL PROTECTED] Genesi, Manager, Developer Relations Robert Schwebel wrote: On Fri, Apr 18, 2008 at 09:10:04AM -0700, Grant Likely wrote: Update dts files to current format Is it somehow possible that this device tree stuff is *not* changed over and over again and break everything out there? When people have not even agreed on basic things like decimal vs. hex numbers, the whole idea should be developed out-of-tree, then stabilize and *then* be submitted to the Linux mainline. Is it also really necessary to change like gpt vs. timer and pic vs. interrupt-controller all the time? If you compare the last mainline kernels, each one got a fundamental change in the naming, each time breaking anyone who doesn't have his stuff in the mainline yet. Sorry, but this is simply annoying, and the whole the only thing we have to do is to define it once and be done then is crap. Robert ___ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
