[3/6] 44x: Removing dead CONFIG_PPC47x

From: Christoph Egger <siccegge@cs.fau.de>

CONFIG_PPC47x doesn't exist in Kconfig, therefore removing all
references for it from the source code.

Signed-off-by: Christoph Egger <siccegge@cs.fau.de>
---
 arch/powerpc/mm/44x_mmu.c |    4 ----
 1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 12:23 AM, Tony Breeds <tony@bakeyournoodle.com> wrote:
> From: Christoph Egger <siccegge@cs.fau.de>
>
> CONFIG_PPC47x doesn't exist in Kconfig, therefore removing all
> references for it from the source code.
>
> Signed-off-by: Christoph Egger <siccegge@cs.fau.de>
> ---
>  arch/powerpc/mm/44x_mmu.c |    4 ----
>  1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/mm/44x_mmu.c b/arch/powerpc/mm/44x_mmu.c
> index f60e006..5d4e3ff 100644
> --- a/arch/powerpc/mm/44x_mmu.c
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/mm/44x_mmu.c
> @@ -78,11 +78,7 @@ static void __init ppc44x_pin_tlb(unsigned int virt, unsigned int phys)
>                "tlbwe  %1,%3,%5\n"
>                "tlbwe  %0,%3,%6\n"
>        :
> -#ifdef CONFIG_PPC47x
> -       : "r" (PPC47x_TLB2_S_RWX),
> -#else
>        : "r" (PPC44x_TLB_SW | PPC44x_TLB_SR | PPC44x_TLB_SX | PPC44x_TLB_G),
> -#endif

That doesn't look right.  The code is there doing something, why is it
just being removed?  I would think the change would be to use
CONFIG_PPC_47x?

Or if the code there isn't needed any longer, the changelog should say why.

josh

On Wed, 2011-11-30 at 06:43 -0500, Josh Boyer wrote:
> 
> That doesn't look right.  The code is there doing something, why is it
> just being removed?  I would think the change would be to use
> CONFIG_PPC_47x?
> 
> Or if the code there isn't needed any longer, the changelog should say
> why.

Ah right, I tripped on this one too when reviewing then figured it out
but I agree, the changelog should be clearer.

If you notice, the original ifdef was in a function that is only ever
used on 44x. There's a separate function that handles 47x. I suppose
this is a leftover of the initial port which somebody forgot to remove.

So the patch is fine, but yes, the changelog could be made clearer.

Cheers,
Ben.