> -----Original Message----- > From: Kumar Gala [mailto:ga...@kernel.crashing.org] > Sent: Thursday, July 02, 2009 7:20 PM > To: Aggrwal Poonam-B10812 > Cc: u-boot@lists.denx.de > Subject: Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 4/5]P2020RDB Removed > CONFIG_NUM_CPUS for 85xx processor series. > > > On Jul 2, 2009, at 5:45 AM, Poonam Aggrwal wrote: > > > Instead the num of cores is determined dynamically by > reading the SVR > > values. > > This can help to use the same u-boot image across the platforms. > > > > Added CONFIG_MAX_CPUS value 8. > > > > Also revamped and corrected few Freescale Copyright messages. > > > > Signed-off-by: Poonam Aggrwal <poonam.aggr...@freescale.com> > > --- > > common/cmd_mp.c | 8 ++- > > cpu/mpc85xx/cpu.c | 104 +++++++++++++++++++++++ > > +---------------- > > cpu/mpc85xx/mp.c | 6 +- > > cpu/mpc85xx/release.S | 25 +++++++++- > > > --- a/lib_ppc/bootm.c > > +++ b/lib_ppc/bootm.c > > @@ -170,11 +170,12 @@ void arch_lmb_reserve(struct lmb *lmb) > > > > static void boot_prep_linux(void) > > { > > -#if (CONFIG_NUM_CPUS > 1) > > +#ifdef CONFIG_MP > > /* if we are MP make sure to flush the dcache() to any > changes are > > made > > * visibile to all other cores */ > > flush_dcache(); > > #endif > > + > > return ; > > } > > Thanks for the comments. Will incorporate them and resend the patch. One question Should I also make the changes for 86xx as well in the same patch? Now that 86xx also follows the same CPU_TYPE_ENTRY structure.
Regards Poonam > > -- > > 1.5.6.3 > > > > _______________________________________________ > > U-Boot mailing list > > U-Boot@lists.denx.de > > http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot > > _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot