Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754011Ab0K2BgS (ORCPT ); Sun, 28 Nov 2010 20:36:18 -0500 Received: from rs35.luxsci.com ([66.216.127.90]:52040 "EHLO rs35.luxsci.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753316Ab0K2BgR (ORCPT ); Sun, 28 Nov 2010 20:36:17 -0500 Message-ID: <4CF30327.9020408@firmworks.com> Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2010 15:34:31 -1000 From: Mitch Bradley User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.12) Gecko/20101027 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.6 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Benjamin Herrenschmidt CC: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, sodaville@linutronix.de, x86@kernel.org, devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/11] x86/dtb: Add a device tree for CE4100 References: <1290706801-7323-1-git-send-email-bigeasy@linutronix.de> <1290706801-7323-4-git-send-email-bigeasy@linutronix.de> <1290808645.32570.158.camel@pasglop> <20101128160449.GC30784@www.tglx.de> <1290984809.32570.208.camel@pasglop> In-Reply-To: <1290984809.32570.208.camel@pasglop> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1676 Lines: 39 On 11/28/2010 12:53 PM, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: >> I wasn't aware of the OFW binding for X86. I will follow it once I find >> it. > > Interesting, I though I would find it on > http://www.openfirmware.info/Bindings but it's not there... > > CC'ing Mitch who might know where to find that. I can't find the x86 binding either, which is a little bit embarrassing since I wrote it, albeit about 15 years ago... If my memory is correct, it is not particularly useful now. It primarily dealt with the ABI for transferring control to the OS and for calling back into the OFW client interface. The only company that used it was Network Appliance, back when they were building their own x86 motherboards (because most off-the-shelf mobo's of that era did not meet their stability requirements). There has been a fair amount of churn since then, in relevant areas like x86 privileged architecture, compiler versions and code generation policies, popular bootloaders, OSs, and Linux early startup code. The net result is that the ABI that the old binding specified probably isn't right for today. I'd be happy to work with people to develop a new x86 binding. The OLPC interface might be of some use as a starting point, but would need some work. It is currently in use on AMD Geode, Via C7, and Intel Atom based systems, but, among other issues, it conflicts with the Physical Address Extension feature. Mitch -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/