aboutsummaryrefslogtreecommitdiffstats
path: root/include/asm-powerpc/dcr-native.h
Commit message (Collapse)AuthorAge
* Use dcr_host_t.base in dcr_unmap()Michael Ellerman2007-10-15
| | | | | | | | | With the base stored in dcr_host_t, there's no need for callers to pass the dcr_n into dcr_unmap(). In fact this removes the possibility of them passing the incorrect value, which would then be iounmap()'ed. Signed-off-by: Michael Ellerman <michael@ellerman.id.au> Signed-off-by: Jeff Garzik <jeff@garzik.org>
* Add dcr_host_t.base in dcr_read()/dcr_write()Michael Ellerman2007-10-15
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Now that all users of dcr_read()/dcr_write() add the dcr_host_t.base, we can save them the trouble and do it in dcr_read()/dcr_write(). As some background to why we just went through all this jiggery-pokery, benh sayeth: Initially the goal of the dcr_read/dcr_write routines was to operate like mfdcr/mtdcr which take absolute DCR numbers. The reason is that on 4xx hardware, indirect DCR access is a pain (goes through a table of instructions) and it's useful to have the compiler resolve an absolute DCR inline. We decided that wasn't worth the API bastardisation since most places where absolute DCR values are used are low level 4xx-only code which may as well continue using mfdcr/mtdcr, while the new API is designed for device "instances" that can exist on 4xx and Axon type platforms and may be located at variable DCR offsets. Signed-off-by: Michael Ellerman <michael@ellerman.id.au> Signed-off-by: Jeff Garzik <jeff@garzik.org>
* [POWERPC] Store the base address in dcr_host_tMichael Ellerman2007-10-02
| | | | | | | | | | In its current form, dcr_map() doesn't remember the base address you passed it, which means you need to store it somewhere else. Rather than adding the base to another struct it seems simpler to store it in the dcr_host_t. Signed-off-by: Michael Ellerman <michael@ellerman.id.au> Acked-by: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org> Signed-off-by: Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>
* [POWERPC] More DCR native fixupsDavid Gibson2007-02-15
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Getting BenH's new EMAC driver working on 440GP, I found some more problems in the native mode paths of the new DCR code: - dcr_map() is supposed to return a dcr_host_t, but the native version is a macro that doesn't expand to an expression. With native DCRs, dcr_host_t is an empty structure, so we just use a constructor expression instead. - dcr_unmap() uses {} instead of the safer do {} while (0) idiom to implement a no-op Here's a fix. Signed-off-by: David Gibson <dwg@au1.ibm.com> Acked-by: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org> Signed-off-by: Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>
* [POWERPC] Only export __mtdcr/__mfdcr if CONFIG_PPC_DCR is setKumar Gala2006-12-11
| | | | | | | | | | On 85xx we don't build in dcr support because the core doesn't implement the instructions. This caused problems when building an 85xx kernel. Additionally made it so we only build __mtdcr/__mfdcr if we are CONFIG_PPC_DCR_NATIVE. The 85xx build issue wasPointed out by Dai Haruki. Signed-off-by: Kumar Gala <galak@kernel.crashing.org>
* [POWERPC] Generic DCR infrastructureBenjamin Herrenschmidt2006-12-04
This patch adds new dcr_map/dcr_read/dcr_write accessors for DCRs that can be used by drivers to transparently address either native DCRs or memory mapped DCRs. The implementation for memory mapped DCRs is done after the binding being currently worked on for SLOF and the Axon chipset. This patch enables it for the cell native platform Signed-off-by: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org> Signed-off-by: Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>