Re: [PATCH 15/15] ppc/ppc405: Update U-Boot board information for hotfoot

[Philippe Mathieu-Daudé]

On 12/6/21 11:37, Cédric Le Goater wrote:
> When support for the ESTeem 195E (PPC405EP) SBC (hotfoot) board was
> added to Linux, a different layout of U-Boot board information was
> introduced because the FW of these boards was an ancient U-Boot
> without dual ethernet support [1].
> 
> Change the QEMU PPC405 board information to match the hotfoot board
> and let the ref405ep machine boot from Linux directly. Only the CPU
> frequency is required.
> 
> This is brutal force. We could possibly add a machine option or a
> ref405ep machine class to update the board information accordingly.
> 
> A similar change would be required in U-Boot. The alternative is to
> change Linux.
> 
> [1] https://lists.ozlabs.org/pipermail/linuxppc-dev/2009-July/074487.html
> 
> Cc: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@c-s.fr>
> Signed-off-by: Cédric Le Goater <clg@kaod.org>
> ---
>  hw/ppc/ppc405_uc.c | 45 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 45 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/hw/ppc/ppc405_uc.c b/hw/ppc/ppc405_uc.c
> index ec97b22bd019..649bb2b0daf5 100644
> --- a/hw/ppc/ppc405_uc.c
> +++ b/hw/ppc/ppc405_uc.c
> @@ -41,6 +41,49 @@
>  #include "qapi/error.h"
>  #include "trace.h"
>  
> +/*
> + * Linux hotfoot board information based on a production bootloader
> + * (u-boot 1.2.0.x) plus changes not upstream.
> + *
> + * https://lists.ozlabs.org/pipermail/linuxppc-dev/2009-July/074487.html
> + */
> +struct linux_hotfoot_bd_info {
> +    long unsigned int          bi_memstart;          /*     0     4 */
> +    long unsigned int          bi_memsize;           /*     4     4 */
> +    long unsigned int          bi_flashstart;        /*     8     4 */
> +    long unsigned int          bi_flashsize;         /*    12     4 */
> +    long unsigned int          bi_flashoffset;       /*    16     4 */
> +    long unsigned int          bi_sramstart;         /*    20     4 */
> +    long unsigned int          bi_sramsize;          /*    24     4 */
> +    long unsigned int          bi_bootflags;         /*    28     4 */
> +    long unsigned int          bi_ip_addr;           /*    32     4 */
> +    unsigned char              bi_enetaddr[6];       /*    36     6 */
> +    unsigned char              bi_enet1addr[6];      /*    42     6 */
> +    short unsigned int         bi_ethspeed;          /*    48     2 */
> +    long unsigned int          bi_intfreq;           /*    52     4 */
> +    long unsigned int          bi_busfreq;           /*    56     4 */
> +    long unsigned int          bi_baudrate;          /*    60     4 */
> +    unsigned char              bi_s_version[4];      /*    64     4 */
> +    unsigned char              bi_r_version[32];     /*    68    32 */
> +    unsigned int               bi_procfreq;          /*   100     4 */
> +    unsigned int               bi_plb_busfreq;       /*   104     4 */
> +    unsigned int               bi_pci_busfreq;       /*   108     4 */
> +    unsigned char              bi_pci_enetaddr[6];   /*   112     6 */
> +    unsigned int               bi_pllouta_freq;      /*   120     4 */
> +    int                        bi_phynum[2];         /*   124     8 */
> +    int                        bi_phymode[2];        /*   132     8 */
> +    unsigned int               bi_opbfreq;           /*   140     4 */
> +    int                        bi_iic_fast[2];       /*   144     8 */
> +};

Why not use <stdint.h> types?