[PATCH 17/61] bootwrapper: Add 8xx support.

[David Gibson]

On Wed, Jul 18, 2007 at 11:13:05AM -0500, Scott Wood wrote:
> David Gibson wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 17, 2007 at 08:33:18PM -0500, Scott Wood wrote:
> > [snip]
> > 
> >>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 at 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