From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1762240AbZEOPgq (ORCPT ); Fri, 15 May 2009 11:36:46 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751572AbZEOPgi (ORCPT ); Fri, 15 May 2009 11:36:38 -0400 Received: from az33egw02.freescale.net ([192.88.158.103]:42737 "EHLO az33egw02.freescale.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751440AbZEOPgi (ORCPT ); Fri, 15 May 2009 11:36:38 -0400 Date: Fri, 15 May 2009 10:36:19 -0500 From: Scott Wood To: Heiko Schocher Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, Wolfgang Denk , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] [PowerPC] MPC8272ADS: fix device tree for 8 MB flash, size Message-ID: <20090515153619.GA24872@b07421-ec1.am.freescale.net> References: <4A0A683B.5010209@denx.de> <20090514214819.GA15549@b07421-ec1.am.freescale.net> <4A0D03AB.2040602@denx.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4A0D03AB.2040602@denx.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAQAAAWE= Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 07:54:51AM +0200, Heiko Schocher wrote: > Scott Wood wrote: > > We should proabbly leave out the ranges altogether, and have u-boot > > populate it from the mappings it establishes. > > No, I vote for manipulating just the entries, which u-boot dynamically > detect, and let the other entries untouched. It is possible that > there is a device which u-boot didn;t use/know, and there is in the DTS > an ranges entry for it (Maybe not on the MPC8727ADS, but we should > define a rule, how a bootloader has to manipulate entries). So if > u-boot build the complete ranges entry, it maybe miss something. If u-boot doesn't know about it, then it didn't create the mapping, and thus it's not accessible (if something later on creates a mapping, it can update ranges itself). The devices themselves would still be described, just not the non-existent mapping. The benefit is that you would have just one place that reads out the localbus config into the device tree, with no error-prone duplication of data, or separate hacks for each board that has something that is variable. We could leave ranges in the dts for cuImage, and have u-boot just overwrite the entire thing rather than patch up individual entries. > > I don't see how current u-boot would accomodate more than 8MiB flash on > > this board (there's some detection in board/freescale/mpc8260ads/flash.c, > > Didn;t this board uses the CFI driver? :-( Not yet, unfortunately. This is pretty old code. -Scott