On Fri, 2014-10-03 at 22:15 +0200, christophe leroy wrote:Indeed no, my intension is to say that relocation is requested. Do you mean that it should then not use a compatible ?
Le 03/10/2014 16:44, Mark Brown a Ãcrit :So the device tree change is about whether relocation is supported, not
On Fri, Oct 03, 2014 at 02:56:09PM +0200, Christophe Leroy wrote:Can't be unconditional as older versions of mpc8xx (eg MPC860) don't
+config CPM1_RELOCSPISomething like this shouldn't be a compile time option. Either it
+ bool "Dynamic SPI relocation"
+ default n
+ help
+ On recent MPC8xx (at least MPC866 and MPC885) SPI can be relocated
+ without micropatch. This activates relocation to a dynamically
+ allocated area in the CPM Dual port RAM.
+ When combined with SPI relocation patch (for older MPC8xx) it avoids
+ the "loss" of additional Dual port RAM space just above the patch,
+ which might be needed for example when using the CPM QMC.
should be unconditional or it should be triggered in some system
specific manner (from DT, from knowing about other users or similar).
support relocation without a micropatch.
I have therefore submitted a v2 based on a DTS compatible property.
whether it is required?
Is this specific to SPI or does the relocationRelocation is the same for I2C.
mechanism work for other things?
What do you mean ?
How about checking for the existing specific-SoC compatibles?