From: Wolfgang Denk <hidden> Date: 2004-03-31 23:06:15
In message [off-list ref] you wrote:
A couple of trivial changes for the processor choice help text to make
it a bit clearer.
...
types (601, 603, 604, 740, 750, 7400), the Motorola embedded
- versions (821, 823, 850, 855, 860, 8260), the IBM embedded
versions
+ versions (821, 823, 850, 855, 860, 82xx), the IBM embedded
How about types like 857, 862, the 866 family, the 885 family, ... ?
Wolfgang Denk
--
Software Engineering: Embedded and Realtime Systems, Embedded Linux
Phone: (+49)-8142-4596-87 Fax: (+49)-8142-4596-88 Email: wd@denx.de
God may be subtle, but He isn't plain mean. - Albert Einstein
** Sent via the linuxppc-dev mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/
From: Dan Malek <hidden> Date: 2004-04-01 00:04:15
Wolfgang Denk wrote:
In message [off-list ref] you wrote:
quoted
types (601, 603, 604, 740, 750, 7400), the Motorola embedded
- versions (821, 823, 850, 855, 860, 8260), the IBM embedded
versions
+ versions (821, 823, 850, 855, 860, 82xx), the IBM embedded
How about types like 857, 862, the 866 family, the 885 family, ... ?
Well, the 821 should be canned, but I think all we differentiate
is 823/850 and "others", don't we? The rest of the configuration
is determined by your I/O choices, which I personally like so we
don't have config files littered with all of the different CPM and
peripheral variations. In fact, I think we currently just ask for
alternate SMC1 pin mapping, so we don't even need to specifically
know 823/850.
Thanks.
-- Dan
** Sent via the linuxppc-dev mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/
From: John Whitney <hidden> Date: 2004-04-01 00:14:12
We can put in "8xx", but I didn't think that the listed processors was
supposed to be an exhaustive list (just some examples). Shall we just
prune them down to "8xx", "4xx", etc.?
John
On Mar 31, 2004, at 6:06 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
In message [off-list ref] you wrote:
quoted
A couple of trivial changes for the processor choice help text to
make it a bit clearer.
...
quoted
types (601, 603, 604, 740, 750, 7400), the Motorola embedded
- versions (821, 823, 850, 855, 860, 8260), the IBM embedded
versions
+ versions (821, 823, 850, 855, 860, 82xx), the IBM embedded
How about types like 857, 862, the 866 family, the 885 family, ... ?
We can put in "8xx", but I didn't think that the listed processors was
supposed to be an exhaustive list (just some examples). Shall we just
prune them down to "8xx", "4xx", etc.?
While you're at it, perhaps s/7400/74xx/ for consistency, too?
On Mar 31, 2004, at 6:06 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
quoted
In message [off-list ref] you wrote:
quoted
A couple of trivial changes for the processor choice help text to
make it a bit clearer.
...
quoted
types (601, 603, 604, 740, 750, 7400), the Motorola embedded
- versions (821, 823, 850, 855, 860, 8260), the IBM embedded
versions
+ versions (821, 823, 850, 855, 860, 82xx), the IBM embedded
How about types like 857, 862, the 866 family, the 885 family, ... ?
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds
** Sent via the linuxppc-dev mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/
From: Kumar Gala <hidden> Date: 2004-04-01 13:49:32
Also, what about 52xx?
- kumar
On Apr 1, 2004, at 2:35 AM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
On Wed, 31 Mar 2004, John Whitney wrote:
quoted
We can put in "8xx", but I didn't think that the listed processors was
supposed to be an exhaustive list (just some examples). Shall we
just
prune them down to "8xx", "4xx", etc.?
While you're at it, perhaps s/7400/74xx/ for consistency, too?
quoted
On Mar 31, 2004, at 6:06 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
quoted
In message [off-list ref] you
wrote:
quoted
A couple of trivial changes for the processor choice help text to
make it a bit clearer.
...
quoted
types (601, 603, 604, 740, 750, 7400), the Motorola embedded
- versions (821, 823, 850, 855, 860, 8260), the IBM embedded
versions
+ versions (821, 823, 850, 855, 860, 82xx), the IBM embedded
How about types like 857, 862, the 866 family, the 885 family, ... ?
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 --
geert@linux-m68k.org
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a
hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something
like that.
-- Linus Torvalds
From: John Whitney <hidden> Date: 2004-04-01 21:50:06
Here's the latest Kconfig help-text patch for your consideration. I
considered enumerating each chip supported, but that will be a
maintenance headache, and I'm not even sure I could list them all. I'm
fairly sure that the 8250 is supported, but it isn't listed in
arch/ppc/kernel/cputable.c, so I'm guessing its PVR is covered by the
8260 entry. I don't want to figure out which ones are supported but
not explicitly covered, so I went with the "##xx" method.
Let me know what you think...
John
From: Kumar Gala <hidden> Date: 2004-04-07 14:25:20
I'm trying to figure how how I would fit the e500 core and 85xx into
your descriptions.
- kumar
On Apr 1, 2004, at 3:50 PM, John Whitney wrote:
Here's the latest Kconfig help-text patch for your consideration. I
considered enumerating each chip supported, but that will be a
maintenance headache, and I'm not even sure I could list them all. I'm
fairly sure that the 8250 is supported, but it isn't listed in
arch/ppc/kernel/cputable.c, so I'm guessing its PVR is covered by the
8260 entry. I don't want to figure out which ones are supported but
not explicitly covered, so I went with the "##xx" method.
Let me know what you think...
John
<Kconfig.patch>
From: Kumar Gala <hidden> Date: 2004-04-07 15:01:03
I'm trying to figure how how I would fit the e500 core and 85xx into
your descriptions.
- kumar
On Apr 1, 2004, at 3:50 PM, John Whitney wrote:
Here's the latest Kconfig help-text patch for your consideration. I
considered enumerating each chip supported, but that will be a
maintenance headache, and I'm not even sure I could list them all. I'm
fairly sure that the 8250 is supported, but it isn't listed in
arch/ppc/kernel/cputable.c, so I'm guessing its PVR is covered by the
8260 entry. I don't want to figure out which ones are supported but
not explicitly covered, so I went with the "##xx" method.
Let me know what you think...
John
<Kconfig.patch>