On Oct 12, 2010, at 3:11 PM, Scott Wood wrote:
> On Tue, 12 Oct 2010 14:55:42 -0500
> Kumar Gala wrote:
>
>>
>> On Oct 12, 2010, at 12:33 PM, Scott Wood wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, 12 Oct 2010 10:50:52 -0500
>>> Kumar Gala wrote:
>>>
The new e5500 core is similar to the e500mc core but adds
On Tue, 12 Oct 2010 14:55:42 -0500
Kumar Gala wrote:
>
> On Oct 12, 2010, at 12:33 PM, Scott Wood wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 12 Oct 2010 10:50:52 -0500
> > Kumar Gala wrote:
> >
> >> The new e5500 core is similar to the e500mc core but adds 64-bit
> >> support. We support running it in 32-bit mode
On Oct 12, 2010, at 12:33 PM, Scott Wood wrote:
> On Tue, 12 Oct 2010 10:50:52 -0500
> Kumar Gala wrote:
>
>> The new e5500 core is similar to the e500mc core but adds 64-bit
>> support. We support running it in 32-bit mode as it is identical to the
>> e500mc.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Kumar Gala
On Tue, 12 Oct 2010 10:50:52 -0500
Kumar Gala wrote:
> The new e5500 core is similar to the e500mc core but adds 64-bit
> support. We support running it in 32-bit mode as it is identical to the
> e500mc.
>
> Signed-off-by: Kumar Gala
> ---
> * Updated to remove CONFIG_PPC_E5500 and use E500MC
The new e5500 core is similar to the e500mc core but adds 64-bit
support. We support running it in 32-bit mode as it is identical to the
e500mc.
Signed-off-by: Kumar Gala
---
* Updated to remove CONFIG_PPC_E5500 and use E500MC
arch/powerpc/include/asm/reg_booke.h |3 ++-
arch/powerpc/
