From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from de01egw01.freescale.net (de01egw01.freescale.net [192.88.165.102]) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E2A82DDDF7 for ; Fri, 16 Feb 2007 03:38:04 +1100 (EST) Received: from de01smr01.freescale.net (de01smr01.freescale.net [10.208.0.31]) by de01egw01.freescale.net (8.12.11/de01egw01) with ESMTP id l1FGc0Au002034 for ; Thu, 15 Feb 2007 09:38:01 -0700 (MST) Received: from az33exm25.fsl.freescale.net (az33exm25.am.freescale.net [10.64.32.16]) by de01smr01.freescale.net (8.13.1/8.13.0) with ESMTP id l1FGc02K002079 for ; Thu, 15 Feb 2007 10:38:00 -0600 (CST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: RE: [PATCH 15/16] Add device tree for Ebony Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2007 09:37:59 -0700 Message-ID: <9696D7A991D0824DBA8DFAC74A9C5FA302A1BABF@az33exm25.fsl.freescale.net> In-Reply-To: <889579906c6fd096a82283d5a3a0227e@kernel.crashing.org> References: <20070213060904.GA6214@localhost.localdomain> <20070213061026.5837FDDDE9@ozlabs.org> <9696D7A991D0824DBA8DFAC74A9C5FA302A1B705@az33exm25.fsl.freescale.net> <1171470754.4003.101.camel@zod.rchland.ibm.com> <6206de08b7f12175bebe669291c66334@kernel.crashing.org> <20070214232246.GE16279@localhost.localdomain> <20070215015316.GL16279@localhost.localdomain> <889579906c6fd096a82283d5a3a0227e@kernel.crashing.org> From: "Yoder Stuart-B08248" To: "Segher Boessenkool" , "David Gibson" Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , =20 > -----Original Message----- > From: Segher Boessenkool [mailto:segher@kernel.crashing.org]=20 > Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2007 9:09 PM > To: David Gibson > Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org; Yoder Stuart-B08248 > Subject: Re: [PATCH 15/16] Add device tree for Ebony >=20 > >> Yes. UIC1 is not addressed via UIC0, and as such should > >> not be a child of it; it should be a direct child of its DCR > >> controller, just like UIC0. > > > > No, the DCR tree, like the interrupt tree in most cases, is > > independent of the main tree structure. >=20 > Yes true; you can hang the UICs from somewhere under the > "soc" node or whatever you want. You need some way to > distinguish separate identical devices though; you can't > do it by device unit since your devices don't have any > (they don't have a "reg" but only a "dcr-reg"). If you > would hang them in a DCR tree, you could use the plain > "reg" property instead of the "dcr-reg" property and > all would be fine (if the DCR binding allows this -- and > it better should, it is the standard OF addressing algorithm). Is there a DCR binding? Are the dcr-* properties documented=20 anywhere: dcr-reg // what do these fields mean? dcr-parent // in case there is more than one controller?? dcr-controller dcr-access-method =3D "native" // what are the other options? Stuart