Current-Users archive

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

Re: merge for gt(4) and Marvell SoC

KIYOHARA Takashi wrote:

> From: Simon Burge <>
> Subject: Re: merge for gt(4) and Marvell SoC 
> Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2009 21:30:43 +1000
> > KIYOHARA Takashi wrote:
> > 
> > > I put newer patch.
> > > 
> > >   
> > >
> > >   
> > >
> > > 
> > > mvsata(4) and mvgbe(4) were moved to dev/marvell.
> > > Next, I merged mvtwsi.  Ooops, gti2c(4) will not work.  It have more bug.
> > > Howver, EV64260 not use gti2c...
> > > 
> > > gt0 at mvsoc0 addr 0xf1000000
> > 
> > What is "gt0" in this context?  The existing uses of "gt" for drivers
> > in NetBSD are for the Galileo Technology system controllers found in
> > some MIPS and PowerPC boards (like the EV64260).  Marvell bought Galileo
> > Technology which is why these appear in sys/dev/marvell.
> > 
> > I suspect you want a different parent bus name for the ARM-based Marvell
> > SoC chips - it looks like this bus is called the Mbus, at least in the
> > 88F5181.
> I have the possibility of not understanding Mbus.
> However, what implementing does the driver of Mbus become?  I was not
> found the difference of the inclusion of this in gt.

The problem is that dev/marvell/gt.c is the driver for Galileo
Technology system controllers, as used in at least the EV64260 board
in the evbppc port.  It's entirely possible that the GT drivers and
the ARM SoC drivers might be able to share code, but the front end for
the ARM SoC drivers shouldn't be in dev/marvell/gt.c and isn't a "GT
system controller driver" as the comment at the top of gt.c currently
says.  If you modify gt.c in the way that you've proposed, will the
EV64260 board that uses the current form of gt.c still work?

> > I also wonder if the ARM-based Marvell device support should live in a
> > separate directory to the Galileo Technology-based system controllers.
> > Perhaps move each to a different subdirectory under sys/dev/marvell?
> I look the same the register of TWSI, IDMA, and PCI.
> Then, I merged i2c(TWSI) first.
> # Shall I post to teck-kern@?

That's a better place to discuss this I think.  I've Bcc'd current-users
and Cc'd tech-kern to move discussion there.


Home | Main Index | Thread Index | Old Index