On Thu, Feb 11, 2021 at 06:34:43AM +, Christophe Leroy wrote:
> unrecoverable_exception() is never expected to return, most callers
> have an infiniteloop in case it returns.
>
> Ensure it really never returns by terminating it with a BUG(), and
> declare it __no_return.
>
> It always GCC to
On Sun, Aug 23, 2020 at 12:54:33AM +0800, Guohua Zhong wrote:
> >In generic version in lib/math/div64.c, there is no checking of 'base'
> >either.
> >Do we really want to add this check in the powerpc version only ?
>
> >The only user of __div64_32() is do_div() in
> >include/asm-generic/div64.h
On Fri, Jul 24, 2020 at 07:25:25PM +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> We have powerpc specific logic in our page fault handling to decide if
> an access to an unmapped address below the stack pointer should expand
> the stack VMA.
>
> The code was originally added in 2004 "ported from 2.4". The roug
On Tue, Sep 03, 2019 at 01:31:57PM -0500, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 03, 2019 at 07:05:19PM +0200, Christophe Leroy wrote:
> > Le 03/09/2019 à 18:04, Segher Boessenkool a écrit :
> > >(Why are they separate though? It could just be one loop var).
> >
> > Yes it could just be a single
On Thu, Jan 24, 2019 at 04:58:41PM +0100, Christophe Leroy wrote:
>
>
> Le 24/01/2019 à 16:01, Christophe Leroy a écrit :
> >
> >
> > Le 24/01/2019 à 10:43, Christophe Leroy a écrit :
> > >
> > >
> > > On 01/24/2019 01:06 AM, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> > > > Christophe Leroy writes:
> > > > >
On Fri, Jan 18, 2019 at 05:18:19PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> The IPC system call handling is highly inconsistent across architectures,
> some use sys_ipc, some use separate calls, and some use both. We also
> have some architectures that require passing IPC_64 in the flags, and
> others that s
On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 01:33:08PM -0600, Larry Finger wrote:
> In kernel 4.15, the modprobe step on my PowerBook G5 started complaining that
PowerBook G5? Really, could you send a pic! :-)
> there was no module license for ans-lcd.
>
> Signed-off-by: Larry Finger
> ---
> drivers/macintosh
On Mon, Dec 18, 2017 at 03:15:51PM -0800, Ram Pai wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 18, 2017 at 02:28:14PM -0800, Dave Hansen wrote:
> > On 12/18/2017 02:18 PM, Ram Pai wrote:
> > > b) minimum number of keys available to the application.
> > > if libraries consumes a few, they could provide a library
> > >
On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 02:32:17PM +, Colin King wrote:
> From: Colin Ian King
>
> Trivial fix to spelling mistake in pr_err error message text. Also
> fix spelling mistake in proceeding comment.
s/proceeding/preceding/ ?
>
> Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King
> ---
> drivers/crypto/nx/nx-842
On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 05:45:04PM -0700, mcg...@kernel.org wrote:
[snip]
> ---
> Documentation/firmware_class/README| 20
> drivers/base/Kconfig | 2 +-
> .../request_firmware-avoid-init-probe-init.cocci | 130
> +
> 3
On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 12:13:21PM +0200, Christophe Leroy wrote:
>
>
> Le 18/08/2016 à 11:58, Gabriel Paubert a écrit :
> >On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 11:44:20AM +0200, Christophe Leroy wrote:
> >>SPRN_ICR must be read for clearing the internal freeze signal which
> >&
On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 11:44:20AM +0200, Christophe Leroy wrote:
> SPRN_ICR must be read for clearing the internal freeze signal which
> is asserted by the single step exception, otherwise the timebase and
> decrementer remain freezed
Minor nit: s/freezed/frozen/
If the timebase and decrementer
On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 05:11:19PM -0500, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 11:34:37PM +0200, Gabriel Paubert wrote:
> > On the other hand gcc did at the time a very poor job (quite an
> > understatement) at bswapdi when compiling for 64 bit processors
>
On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 12:18:15PM +0200, Christophe Leroy wrote:
>
>
> Le 10/08/2016 à 10:56, Gabriel Paubert a écrit :
> >On Fri, Aug 05, 2016 at 01:28:02PM +0200, Christophe Leroy wrote:
> >>Signed-off-by: Christophe Leroy
> >>---
> >> arch/po
On Fri, Aug 05, 2016 at 01:28:02PM +0200, Christophe Leroy wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Christophe Leroy
> ---
> arch/powerpc/kernel/misc_32.S | 3 +--
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kernel/misc_32.S b/arch/powerpc/kernel/misc_32.S
> index e025230..e180
On Mon, May 23, 2016 at 10:46:02AM +0200, Christophe Leroy wrote:
> current_stack_pointeur() is a single instruction function. it
> It is not worth breaking the execution flow with a bl/blr for a
> single instruction
Are you sure that the result is always the same?
Calling an external function p
On Mon, May 23, 2016 at 10:46:36AM +0200, Christophe Leroy wrote:
> lmw/stmw have a 1 cycle (2 cycles for lmw on some ppc) in addition
> and implies serialising, however it reduces the amount of instructions
> hence the amount of instruction fetch compared to the equivalent
> operation with several
On Fri, May 13, 2016 at 04:16:57PM +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> On Thu, 2016-12-05 at 15:32:22 UTC, Christophe Leroy wrote:
> > With the ffs() function as defined in arch/powerpc/include/asm/bitops.h
> > GCC will not optimise the code in case of constant parameter, as shown
> > by the small exe
On Wed, Mar 09, 2016 at 03:26:21PM -0600, Scott Wood wrote:
> On Wed, 2016-03-09 at 11:28 +0100, Gabriel Paubert wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 09, 2016 at 12:38:18AM -0600, Scott Wood wrote:
> > > On Tue, Mar 08, 2016 at 08:59:12AM +0100, Alessio Igor Bogani wrote:
> > > &
On Wed, Mar 09, 2016 at 12:38:18AM -0600, Scott Wood wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 08, 2016 at 08:59:12AM +0100, Alessio Igor Bogani wrote:
> > The mtmsr() function hangs during restart. Make reboot works on
> > MVME5100 removing that function call.
> > ---
> > arch/powerpc/platforms/embedded6xx/mvme5100.c
On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 08:20:13AM +0200, Christophe JAILLET wrote:
> Le 15/10/2015 08:36, Michael Ellerman a écrit :
> >On Thu, 2015-10-15 at 07:56 +0200, Christophe JAILLET wrote:
> >>Use 'of_property_read_u32()' instead of 'of_get_property()'+pointer
> >>dereference in order to avoid access to p
On Mon, May 04, 2015 at 12:33:38PM -0700, Richard Henderson wrote:
[snipped]
> (3) Note that ppc is both easier and more complicated.
>
> There we have 8 4-bit registers, although most of the integer
> non-comparisons only write to CR0. And the vector non-comparisons
> only write to CR1, th
On Fri, Sep 05, 2014 at 03:28:47PM +1000, Michael Neuling wrote:
> The Debian powerpc little endian architecture is called ppc64le. This
Huh? ppc64le or ppc64el?
> is the default architecture used by Ubuntu for powerpc.
>
> The below checks the kernel config to see if we are compiling little
>
On Thu, Mar 06, 2014 at 09:44:47AM +, David Laight wrote:
> From: Sukadev Bhattiprolu
> > When checking whether a bit representing a register is set in
> > sample_regs, a 64-bit mask, use 64-bit value (1LL).
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Sukadev Bhattiprolu
> > ---
> > tools/perf/util/unwind.c |
On Mon, Feb 03, 2014 at 08:16:49AM +0100, Michael Moese wrote:
> Allow for IO memory to be mapped cacheable for performing
> PCI read bursts.
>
> Signed-off-by: Michael Moese
> ---
> arch/powerpc/include/asm/io.h | 3 +++
> arch/powerpc/mm/pgtable_32.c | 8
> 2 files changed, 11 insert
On Tue, Feb 12, 2008 at 01:30:03PM +0100, Gabriel Paubert wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 12, 2008 at 12:49:05PM +0100, Gabriel Paubert wrote:
> > On Fri, Feb 08, 2008 at 07:40:43PM +1100, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> > >
> > > On Fri, 2008-02-08 at 01:44 +0100, Bart
On Tue, Feb 12, 2008 at 12:49:05PM +0100, Gabriel Paubert wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 08, 2008 at 07:40:43PM +1100, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, 2008-02-08 at 01:44 +0100, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
> > > - couple of fixes and preparatory patches
> >
On Fri, Feb 08, 2008 at 07:40:43PM +1100, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
>
> On Fri, 2008-02-08 at 01:44 +0100, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
> > - couple of fixes and preparatory patches
> >
> > - rework of PowerMac media-bay support ([un]register IDE devices instead of
> > [un]registering I
On Fri, May 18, 2007 at 05:52:45PM +0100, Matt Sealey wrote:
> Kumar Gala wrote:
> >
> > On May 18, 2007, at 9:48 AM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> >
> >> On Fri, 2007-05-18 at 15:28 +0100, Matt Sealey wrote:
> >>>
> >>> I think both the MPC52xx GPT0-7 and the SLT0-1 fulfil this fairly
> >>> easily.
>
On Thu, May 10, 2007 at 02:25:52AM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> since it is referenced by memmap_init_zone (which is __meminit) via the
> early_pfn_in_nid macro when CONFIG_NODES_SPAN_OTHER_NODES is set (which
> basically means PowerPC 64).
>
> This removes a section mismatch warning in those
On Wed, Jan 24, 2007 at 08:08:12PM +1100, Paul Mackerras wrote:
> Mathieu Desnoyers writes:
>
> > +static __inline__ int local_dec_if_positive(local_t *l)
> > +{
> > + int t;
> > +
> > + __asm__ __volatile__(
> > +"1:lwarx %0,0,%1 # local_dec_if_positive\n\
> > + addic. %0
server is run on a 32 bit
big-endian machine (it would have been visible on all 32 bit
architectures if the 6th parameter had been used). The results
are interesting: all files have an inode of 0 (unique you say?)
from getdents(2) and even ls(1) does not find any files.
Signed-off-by: Gabriel
On Thu, Feb 24, 2005 at 04:57:56PM +0200, M.Baris Demiray wrote:
>
> Steven Rostedt wrote:
>
> >[...]
> >
> >Anyone know if the linux-2.6.11-rc5.tar.bz2 has all the changes in it?
> >The tarball rc5 is smaller than rc4. Was there a lot taken out?
>
> Take a look at the diffview of 2.6.11-rc4-rc5
On Thu, Feb 17, 2005 at 05:56:03PM -0500, Jon Smirl wrote:
> On Fri, 18 Feb 2005 09:45:50 +1100, Benjamin Herrenschmidt
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Can't the size be obtained like any other BAR ?
>
> yes, but cards that don't fully decode their ROM address space can
> waste memory in copy_
On Mon, 23 Apr 2001, george anzinger wrote:
> "Robert H. de Vries" wrote:
> >
> > On Monday 23 April 2001 19:45, you wrote:
> >
> > > By the way, is the user land stuff the same for all "arch"s?
> >
> > Not if you plan to handle the CPU cycle counter in user space. That is at
> > least what
On Wed, 18 Apr 2001, Grant Erickson wrote:
> >From the looks of drivers/char/rtc.c it would appear that this kernel
> driver only supports bus-attached RTCs such as the mentioned MC146818. Is
> this correct?
I think so.
>
> What is the correct access method / kernel tie-in for supporting su
On Fri, 20 Oct 2000, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> Many thanks to Doug and Gabriel for very useful explanations about this FPU
> stuff. I suggest Gabriel to submit his way faster and more correct tag word
> conversion function to Linus for 2.4.x.
Here it a first shot, twd_i387_to_fxsr is guarantee
37 matches
Mail list logo
