[U-Boot] [PATCH 4/5]P2020RDB Removed CONFIG_NUM_CPUS for 85xx processor series.

[Kumar Gala]

On Jul 2, 2009, at 10:58 PM, Aggrwal Poonam-B10812 wrote:

>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Kumar Gala [mailto:galak at kernel.crashing.org]
>> Sent: Thursday, July 02, 2009 7:20 PM
>> To: Aggrwal Poonam-B10812
>> Cc: u-boot at lists.denx.de
>> Subject: Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 4/5]P2020RDB Removed
>> CONFIG_NUM_CPUS for 85xx processor series.
>>
>>
>> On Jul 2, 2009, at 5:45 AM, Poonam Aggrwal wrote:
>>
>>> Instead the num of cores is determined dynamically by
>> reading the SVR
>>> values.
>>> This can help to use the same u-boot image across the platforms.
>>>
>>> Added CONFIG_MAX_CPUS value 8.
>>>
>>> Also revamped and corrected few Freescale Copyright messages.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Poonam Aggrwal <poonam.aggrwal at freescale.com>
>>> ---
>>> common/cmd_mp.c               |    8 ++-
>>> cpu/mpc85xx/cpu.c             |  104 +++++++++++++++++++++++
>>> +----------------
>>> cpu/mpc85xx/mp.c              |    6 +-
>>> cpu/mpc85xx/release.S         |   25 +++++++++-
>>
>>> --- a/lib_ppc/bootm.c
>>> +++ b/lib_ppc/bootm.c
>>> @@ -170,11 +170,12 @@ void arch_lmb_reserve(struct lmb *lmb)
>>>
>>> static void boot_prep_linux(void)
>>> {
>>> -#if (CONFIG_NUM_CPUS > 1)
>>> +#ifdef CONFIG_MP
>>> 	/* if we are MP make sure to flush the dcache() to any
>> changes are
>>> made
>>> 	 * visibile to all other cores */
>>> 	flush_dcache();
>>> #endif
>>> +
>>> 	return ;
>>> }
>>>
> Thanks for the comments.
> Will incorporate them and resend the patch.
> One question Should I also make the changes for 86xx as well in the  
> same
> patch?
> Now that 86xx also follows the same CPU_TYPE_ENTRY structure.


Yes.  I've already committed a patch for 86xx to us the basic setup of  
CPU_TYPE_ENTRY as 85xx.  This is in the u-boot-85xx.git tree.

http://git.denx.de/?p=u-boot/u-boot-mpc85xx.git;a=commit;h=480f61790565d77432b70b4016b73f2ae27d530f

Please update the patches based on the u-boot-85xx.git tree

- k