Re: [PATCH 17/61] bootwrapper: Add 8xx support.
From: David Gibson <hidden>
Date: 2007-07-19 01:32:30
On Wed, Jul 18, 2007 at 11:13:05AM -0500, Scott Wood wrote:
David Gibson wrote:quoted
On Tue, Jul 17, 2007 at 08:33:18PM -0500, Scott Wood wrote: [snip]quoted
diff --git a/arch/powerpc/boot/cuboot-8xx.c b/arch/powerpc/boot/cuboot-8xx.c new file mode 100644 index 0000000..35476a0 --- /dev/null +++ b/arch/powerpc/boot/cuboot-8xx.c@@ -0,0 +1,47 @@ +/* + * Old U-boot compatibility for 8xx + * + * Author: Scott Wood <scottwood@freescale.com> + * + * Copyright (c) 2007 Freescale Semiconductor, Inc. + * + * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify it + * under the terms of the GNU General Public License version 2 as published + * by the Free Software Foundation. + */ + +#include "ops.h" +#include "stdio.h" +#include "cuboot.h" + +#define TARGET_8xx +#define TARGET_HAS_ETH1^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Is that really true for all 8xx boards?Well, no. Even on a given board, it depends on the version of u-boot. There's nothing after enet1addr that the bootwrapper cares about, though, so the only harm is if the device tree has a second network interface but u-boot doesn't know about it, and the bootwrapper ends up pulling in junk rather than leaving zeroes.
That sounds like a terribly fragile way of handling things. -- David Gibson | I'll have my music baroque, and my code david AT gibson.dropbear.id.au | minimalist, thank you. NOT _the_ _other_ | _way_ _around_! http://www.ozlabs.org/~dgibson