On 5/6/08, Sascha Hauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, May 05, 2008 at 01:22:40PM -0400, Jon Smirl wrote:
> > On 5/5/08, Grant Likely <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > On Mon, May 5, 2008 at 11:01 AM, Jon Smirl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > Did this get fixed somehow? I used to need this to boot a pcm030.
> > >
> > >
> > > I'm sorry; I'm at a lost as to context. Are you asking for this patch
> > > to be applied? Or are you asking if this has been addressed in
> > > another way?
> >
> > Sascha said the pcm030 was working with the simple dts. I always
> > needed that patch to get a pcm030 to boot. Sasha's company wrote the
> > patch. I'm just wondering how it got handled, do we still need the
> > patch or did he come up with some other solution.
>
>
> Yes, it is working with the simple dts except for the flash support. For
> this we need the Flash description in the oftree.
>
>
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/fs/jffs2/scan.c b/fs/jffs2/scan.c
> > > > index 272872d..c982adc 100644
> > > > --- a/fs/jffs2/scan.c
> > > > +++ b/fs/jffs2/scan.c
> > > > @@ -16,6 +16,7 @@
> > > > #include <linux/pagemap.h>
> > > > #include <linux/crc32.h>
> > > > #include <linux/compiler.h>
> > > > +#include <asm/io.h>
> > > > #include "nodelist.h"
> > > > #include "summary.h"
> > > > #include "debug.h"
> > > > @@ -505,7 +506,7 @@ static int jffs2_scan_eraseblock (struct
> > > > jffs2_sb_info *c, struct jffs2_eraseblo
> > > > sumptr = kmalloc(sumlen,
> GFP_KERNEL);
> > > > if (!sumptr)
> > > > return -ENOMEM;
> > > > - memcpy(sumptr + sumlen -
> > > > buf_len, buf + buf_size - buf_len, buf_len);
> > > > + memcpy_fromio(sumptr + sumlen
> > > > - buf_len, buf + buf_size - buf_len, buf_len);
> > > > }
> > > > if (buf_len < sumlen) {
> > > > /* Need to read more so that
> > > > the entire summary node is present */
> > > > @@ -1035,7 +1036,7 @@ static int jffs2_scan_dirent_node(struct
> > > > jffs2_sb_info *c, struct jffs2_eraseblo
> > > > if (!fd) {
> > > > return -ENOMEM;
> > > > }
> > > > - memcpy(&fd->name, rd->name, checkedlen);
> > > > + memcpy_fromio(&fd->name, rd->name, checkedlen);
>
>
> This patch is needed because memcpy uses unaligned accesses whereas
> memcpy_fromio only uses aligned accesses on the io side. See this
> thread: http://ozlabs.org/pipermail/linuxppc-embedded/2006-April/022544.html
Can you submit it for inclusion? That's the last thing needed to boot
a pcm030 on a standard kernel, right?
--
Jon Smirl
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org
https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
