On Sat, 2 Jul 2016 15:25:07 +0530
Bharata B Rao wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 02, 2016 at 12:41:14AM +0200, Greg Kurz wrote:
> > This series is a sequel to the discussion on a patch from Ben's powernv
> > patchset:
> >
> > http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/597153/
> >
> > Indeed, since the DT is
On Sat, Jul 02, 2016 at 12:41:14AM +0200, Greg Kurz wrote:
> This series is a sequel to the discussion on a patch from Ben's powernv
> patchset:
>
> http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/597153/
>
> Indeed, since the DT is a machine abstraction, it should definitely sit
> under hw/ppc and not
This series is a sequel to the discussion on a patch from Ben's powernv
patchset:
http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/597153/
Indeed, since the DT is a machine abstraction, it should definitely sit
under hw/ppc and not in the target code:
- all machine types are forced to share the same num
