On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 08:59:29AM -0800, David Daney wrote: > On 02/22/2011 04:07 PM, David Gibson wrote: > >On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 12:57:46PM -0800, David Daney wrote: > >>Signed-off-by: David Daney<ddaney@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >>--- > >> arch/mips/cavium-octeon/.gitignore | 2 + > >> arch/mips/cavium-octeon/Makefile | 13 ++ > >> arch/mips/cavium-octeon/octeon_3xxx.dts | 314 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > >> arch/mips/cavium-octeon/octeon_68xx.dts | 99 ++++++++++ > >> 4 files changed, 428 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) > >> create mode 100644 arch/mips/cavium-octeon/.gitignore > >> create mode 100644 arch/mips/cavium-octeon/octeon_3xxx.dts > >> create mode 100644 arch/mips/cavium-octeon/octeon_68xx.dts > >> > [...] > > >>+ }; > >>+ }; > > > >Uh.. where are the CPUs? > > > > The number and type of CPUs can be (and is) probed. There is an > existing mechanism for the bootloader to communicate which CPUs > should be used. Hrm, ok. Grant, We've seen this now on both MIPS and ARM - dts files with no cpus, on the grounds that those can be runtime probed. I guess it makes sense, although a dts without cpus looks very, very odd to me. What are your thoughts on this? -- David Gibson | I'll have my music baroque, and my code david AT gibson.dropbear.id.au | minimalist, thank you. NOT _the_ _other_ | _way_ _around_! http://www.ozlabs.org/~dgibson
