Re: [RFC][PATCH 3/8] 4xx MMU

On Jul 11, 2007, at 3:56 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:

On Wednesday 11 July 2007, Josh Boyer wrote:

quoted

+#elif defined(CONFIG_40x)
+/* 40x-style software loaded TLB */
+#  include <asm/mmu-4xx.h>
 #elif defined(CONFIG_44x)
 /* 44x-style software loaded TLB */
 #  include <asm/mmu-44x.h>

If you call it mmu-4xx, shouldn't it be used
for 44x as well? I would think this either
should be

quoted

+#elif defined(CONFIG_4xx)
+/* 40x-style software loaded TLB */
+#  include <asm/mmu-4xx.h>
-#elif defined(CONFIG_44x)
-/* 44x-style software loaded TLB */
-#  include <asm/mmu-44x.h>

or

quoted

+#elif defined(CONFIG_40x)
+/* 40x-style software loaded TLB */
+#  include <asm/mmu-40x.h>
 #elif defined(CONFIG_44x)
 /* 44x-style software loaded TLB */
 #  include <asm/mmu-44x.h>

Is it actually feasible to get to a point where
you can build a kernel that boots on both
40x and 44x, or is it just too different?

I'm guessing its too different since 40x probably has a real mode and  
44x doesnt.

However, I agree we should go ahead and rename 4xx to 40x at this  
point in arch/powerpc.

- k