Re: [Ppcboot-users] Why is bd_t variant?

[Ricardo S. <sc...@di...>]

Rich,



Thursday, November 29, 2001, 3:59:44 PM, you wrote:

RI> Hi all,

RI> I've been digging through the code and discovered something that I think 
RI> is odd.  Caveat: I know *nothing* about what the Linux kernel expects 
RI> from the loader.

OK.

RI> The bd_info struct (and bd_t type) has some board specific stuff in it 
RI> that is present or not depending on some CONFIG_xxx defines.  Now, 

[snip]

RI> It seems to me that the non-variant data in the bd_info struct should be
RI> grouped and the variant stuff should be referenced via a single board 
RI> specific structure pointer.  Yes, this would change a lot of code, but 
RI> if this structure is to be passed to outside 'unlinked' code, it seems 
RI> to me that this would keep ppcboot much more compatible.  I can do a 
RI> patch, but I can't test anything other than the EVB64260 build.

RI> Thoughts?  Flames?

I think this is not an important issue. There is already bd_info/bd_t
definitions in the Linux tree (include/asm-ppc/ppcboot.h). All you have
to do is to keep them synchronized to those in PPCBoot...

[]'s, Scop                            mailto:sc...@di...

------------------------------------------------------------------
"What's money? A man is a success if he gets up in the morning and
goes to bed at night and in between does what he wants to do."
~Bob Dylan