Re: [PATCH 0/4] PowerPC: 440GRx Rainier board support.
On Tue, 30 Oct 2007 19:45:11 +0300 Valentine Barshak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The following patches add PowerPC 440GRx Rainier board support. > The board is almost identical to Sequoia, but doesn't have USB > and FPU is not supported. General FYI, I'm probably going to queue these up for .25. We should be in bug-fix mode for .24. josh ___ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
Re: [PATCH 0/4] PowerPC: 440GRx Rainier board support.
Josh Boyer wrote: > On Tue, 30 Oct 2007 19:45:11 +0300 > Valentine Barshak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> The following patches add PowerPC 440GRx Rainier board support. >> The board is almost identical to Sequoia, but doesn't have USB >> and FPU is not supported. > > General FYI, I'm probably going to queue these up for .25. We should > be in bug-fix mode for .24. OK, thanks, Valentine. > > josh ___ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
Re: [PATCH 0/4] PowerPC: 440GRx Rainier board support.
On Tue, 30 Oct 2007 19:45:11 +0300 Valentine Barshak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The following patches add PowerPC 440GRx Rainier board support. > The board is almost identical to Sequoia, but doesn't have USB > and FPU is not supported. So why do we need anything other than the DTS and the defconfig? I would think the sequoia wrapper and platform files would suffice completely for this. josh ___ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
Re: [PATCH 0/4] PowerPC: 440GRx Rainier board support.
Josh Boyer wrote: > On Tue, 30 Oct 2007 19:45:11 +0300 > Valentine Barshak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> The following patches add PowerPC 440GRx Rainier board support. >> The board is almost identical to Sequoia, but doesn't have USB >> and FPU is not supported. > > So why do we need anything other than the DTS and the defconfig? I > would think the sequoia wrapper and platform files would suffice > completely for this. Yes, they would, but how to handle the board name in this case? I mean the resulting image would be cuImage.sequoia for rainier and the DTS board name has to be sequoia for rainier too. I don't now, may be it's not a big deal to call rainier a sequoia though. What do you think? Thanks, Valentine. > > josh ___ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
Re: [PATCH 0/4] PowerPC: 440GRx Rainier board support.
On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 15:21:13 +0300 Valentine Barshak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Josh Boyer wrote: > > On Tue, 30 Oct 2007 19:45:11 +0300 > > Valentine Barshak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >> The following patches add PowerPC 440GRx Rainier board support. > >> The board is almost identical to Sequoia, but doesn't have USB > >> and FPU is not supported. > > > > So why do we need anything other than the DTS and the defconfig? I > > would think the sequoia wrapper and platform files would suffice > > completely for this. > > Yes, they would, but how to handle the board name in this case? > I mean the resulting image would be cuImage.sequoia for rainier and the > DTS board name has to be sequoia for rainier too. > I don't now, may be it's not a big deal to call rainier a sequoia though. > What do you think? Let me think about this for a bit. Theoretically, there should be a way to have a common code base between these two boards and have the images use the right names. josh ___ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
