Hi Eugene, On Friday 16 September 2005 18:27, Eugene Surovegin wrote: > On Fri, Sep 16, 2005 at 01:06:16PM +0200, Stefan Roese wrote: > > Add U-Boot support to AMCC PPC405 eval boards (bubinga, sycamore and > > walnut) and cleanup PPC440 eval boards (bamboo, ebony, luan and ocotea) > > to better support U-Boot as bootloader. > > In general, 44x pieces look OK, but 40x aren't. Notice, that we don't > have any #ifdef CONFIG_UBOOT in 44x sources. Let's not add them for > 40x, try to replicate the same boot-wrapper approach as Matt used for > 44x.
OK. I'll split the patch in two (44x and 40x stuff) so we can get the 44x pieces on the way. Just to be sure: The 44x boot-wrapper approach you mention is "boot/simple/pibs.c"? <snip> > [snip] > > > --- a/arch/ppc/platforms/4xx/bubinga.c > > +++ b/arch/ppc/platforms/4xx/bubinga.c > > @@ -89,7 +89,11 @@ bubinga_early_serial_map(void) > > * by 16. > > */ > > uart_div = (mfdcr(DCRN_CPC0_UCR_BASE) & DCRN_CPC0_UCR_U0DIV); > > +#ifdef CONFIG_UBOOT > > + uart_clock = __res.bi_procfreq / uart_div; > > +#else > > uart_clock = __res.bi_pllouta_freq / uart_div; > > +#endif > > Why not just rename this field and skip this ugly ifdefing? That's better. Will be updated in next try. Best regards, Stefan
