[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Qemu-devel] [Qemu-ppc] [PATCH 2/2] [v3] target-ppc: Enhance CPU nod

From: Alexander Graf
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [Qemu-ppc] [PATCH 2/2] [v3] target-ppc: Enhance CPU nodes of device tree to be PAPR compliant.
Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2013 12:18:14 +0200

On 12.08.2013, at 23:22, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:

> On Mon, 2013-08-12 at 21:17 +0200, Thomas Huth wrote:
>> Am Mon, 12 Aug 2013 16:03:24 +1000
>> schrieb Benjamin Herrenschmidt <address@hidden>:
>>> On Mon, 2013-08-12 at 10:07 +0530, Prerna Saxena wrote:
>>> .../...
>>>> I dont know what context lead to this observation.
>>>> However, PAPR mentions the following nomenclature guideline:
>>>> "The value of this property shall be of the form: “PowerPC,<name>”,
>>>> where <name> is the name of the processor chip which may be displayed to
>>>> the user. <name> shall not contain underscores."
>>> This actually comes from the original Open Firmware binding for PowerPC
>>> processors, which PAPR inherits largely from. Thus this naming scheme
>>> should apply to all PowerPC processors when a device-tree is involved.
>> Well, I think it should be used when an Open Firmware environment is
>> used. When you boot via ePAPR device tree, the name should be "cpu"
>> instead, according to the ePAPR specification.
> Yeah well ... this is a gratuituous change in ePAPR, I don't think it
> matters really what the name is anyway. I'd suggest sticking to the
> original OF binding.

Can't we just include the PowerPC, bit as part of the fw_name field in the 
class? I don't think we have any CPUs that can be used both in ePAPR and sPAPR 
environments. So the POWER7 fw_name field would just contain "PowerPC,POWER7" 
and the device tree creation code merely appends the @%d piece.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]