On Wed, Mar 11, 2009 at 10:03:22AM -0600, Grant Likely wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 11, 2009 at 9:50 AM, Johns Daniel wrote:
> > A semicolon at the end of the macro means that the for loop has an
> > empty body, and so TSEC/MDIO will not work with older device trees.
> >
> > This fix only applies to 2.6.2
Most of the code enabled by these options is __init, and it's much
more useful to actually run the tests.
Signed-off-by: Michael Ellerman
---
arch/powerpc/configs/ppc64_defconfig |6 +++---
1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/powerpc/configs/ppc64_defconfig
b
Signed-off-by: Michael Ellerman
---
arch/powerpc/sysdev/msi_bitmap.c |6 +++---
1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/powerpc/sysdev/msi_bitmap.c b/arch/powerpc/sysdev/msi_bitmap.c
index f84217b..5a32cbe 100644
--- a/arch/powerpc/sysdev/msi_bitmap.c
+++ b/arch/po
Hi Linus !
So here's the new ps3 nvram driver for 2.6.29 that we discussed earlier
Cheers,
Ben.
The following changes since commit 9ead64974b05501bbac0d63a47c99fa786d064ba:
Linus Torvalds (1):
Merge git://git.kernel.org/.../sam/kbuild-fixes
are available in the git repository at:
g
On Wed, Mar 11, 2009 at 06:26:12PM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> Hi Kyle,
>
> On Wed, 11 Mar 2009, Kyle McMartin wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 11, 2009 at 11:36:02AM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> > > Is it OK for you to take it through your PA-RISC tree?
> > > If yes, I can resend the pat
Nathan Lynch wrote:
> Nathan Lynch wrote:
>> Oren Laadan wrote:
>>> Nathan Lynch wrote:
What doesn't work:
* restarting a 32-bit task from a 64-bit task and vice versa
>>> Is there a test to bail if we attempt to checkpoint such tasks ?
>> No, but I'll add one if it looks too hard to f
On Wed, 2009-03-11 at 14:53 +1100, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> This patch tweaks the way some PTE bit combinations are defined, in such a
> way that the 32 and 64-bit variant become almost identical and that will
> make it easier to bring in a new common pte-* file for the new variant
> of the
Nathan Lynch wrote:
> On Tue, 24 Feb 2009 13:58:26 -0600
> "Serge E. Hallyn" wrote:
>
>> Quoting Nathan Lynch (n...@pobox.com):
>>> Nathan Lynch wrote:
Oren Laadan wrote:
> Nathan Lynch wrote:
>> What doesn't work:
>> * restarting a 32-bit task from a 64-bit task and vice vers
Can someone explain CLOCK_TICK_RATE to me? It's defined in
arch/powerpc/include/asm/timex.h as such:
#define CLOCK_TICK_RATE 1024000 /* Underlying HZ */
Every architecture defines this, but some use the better comment
"Underlying frequency of the HZ timer".
My question is: why is this a constan
Any advantages on the PPC of using SLUB or SLOB over SLAB? I am
especially interested in memory savings.
Cheers,
Sean
___
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org
https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
This patch fixes the circular locking problem by changing the locking strategy
concerning the logging of firmware handles.
Signed-off-by: Jan-Bernd Themann
---
drivers/net/ehea/ehea.h |2 +-
drivers/net/ehea/ehea_main.c | 56 ++---
2 files chang
> -Original Message-
> From:
> linuxppc-dev-bounces+matthias.lange=beissbarth@ozlabs.org
> [mailto:linuxppc-dev-bounces+matthias.lange=beissbarth@ozl
> abs.org] On Behalf Of Grant Likely
> Sent: Thursday, March 12, 2009 2:32 PM
> To: EXTERNAL Lange Matthias (AA-DGW/ENG1)
> Cc: linux
Please note: the proposed patch is actually incomplete, someone with better
knowledge of PowerPC assembly than me should complete it.
According to the errata from Freescale, the proposed workaround should be a
complete LRW (Least-Recently Written) implementation. AFAIK that would
implicate hold
On Thu, Mar 12, 2009 at 5:24 AM, EXTERNAL Lange Matthias (AA-DGW/ENG1)
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am working on a MPC5200-based board. There is a dual port RAM connected to
> the MPC5200 via the localbus. In my setup one can raise an interrupt at the
> MPC5200 to signal new that new data has arrived in
Partial workaround for DTLB errata in MPC5121e processors of die M36P and
older (all currently existing versions).
Due to the bug, the hardware-implemented LRU algorythm always goes to way 1 of
the TLB. This fix forces writes to go to way 0, which would speed up
memory-copy operations where bit
Michael Ellerman wrote:
So how about this:
>From 7325aea8244ac83d98cde7a509ec8ab5994cdb0e Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Michael Ellerman
Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2009 23:14:58 +1100
Subject: [PATCH] powerpc/cell: axonram depends on BLOCK
Signed-off-by: Michael Ellerman
---
Yup that works. Thanks
Sachin P. Sant wrote:
Mel Gorman wrote:
Well, the machine must have started with some kernel. What mainline
version does that correspond to and can you bisect it?
The last booted kernel was a 2.6.25 based kernel. I am trying to find out
the last good kernel.org kernel. I should have that in
On Thu, 2009-03-12 at 13:59 +0530, Sachin Sant wrote:
> Hi Stephen,
>
> Today's next randconfig build on powerpc fails with
>
> CC [M] arch/powerpc/sysdev/axonram.o
> arch/powerpc/sysdev/axonram.c:108: warning: ‘struct request_queue’ declared
> inside parameter list
> arch/powerpc/sysdev/axon
Hi,
I am working on a MPC5200-based board. There is a dual port RAM connected to
the MPC5200 via the localbus. In my setup one can raise an interrupt at the
MPC5200 to signal new that new data has arrived in the dual port RAM. I have
already found out that the interrupt delivery actually works
Ok,
I answer to myself, to whomever it may interest: the DMA controller to
use is the PCI_DMA controller, and not the generic DMA controller.
Right now, I'm trying to figure out if there's a generic PCI API I can
extend to talk to the PCI DMA controller.
Matteo Fortini ha scritto:
Hi all,
Hi,
I'm working on adding PCI support for the Xilinx ML510 FPGA board. The board
contains a Virtex-5 FPGA (containing two PPC440 cores), a ALI M1533 pci south
bridge, pci slots and more.
I have written code (inspired by the powermac pci code) which initializes the
pci soft-core which is in my
On Thursday 12 March 2009, Josh Boyer wrote:
> >> Yes, that's also how I use it on canyonlands... now, the wrapper could
> >> probably be used to look at the bd_t anyways, no ?
> >
> >Sure.
>
> Do newer U-Boot versions pass both the dtb and the bd_t?
Both is possible. The user can choose by using
On Thu, Mar 12, 2009 at 09:24:13AM +0100, Stefan Roese wrote:
>On Thursday 12 March 2009, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
>> On Thu, 2009-03-12 at 09:05 +0100, Stefan Roese wrote:
>> > Both is possible. Older U-Boot versions only passed the bd_t struct to
>> > the kernel. For those U-Boot's the wrapp
Hi,
I'm working on adding PCI support for the Xilinx ML510 FPGA board. The board
contains a Virtex-5 FPGA (containing two PPC440 cores), a ALI M1533 pci south
bridge, pci slots and more.
I have written code (inspired by the powermac pci code) which initializes the
pci soft-core which is in my
Stefan Roese wrote:
Either get the mem
size from there or some flag or version in there can indicate if it's
been "fixed".
I don't think that we have some flag and/or version information in the bd_info
struct. And extending this struct doesn't sound like a good idea to me.
May I suggest an
Hi Stephen,
Today's next randconfig build on powerpc fails with
CC [M] arch/powerpc/sysdev/axonram.o
arch/powerpc/sysdev/axonram.c:108: warning: ‘struct request_queue’ declared
inside parameter list
arch/powerpc/sysdev/axonram.c:108: warning: its scope is only this definition
or declaration,
On Thursday 12 March 2009, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> On Thu, 2009-03-12 at 09:05 +0100, Stefan Roese wrote:
> > Both is possible. Older U-Boot versions only passed the bd_t struct to
> > the kernel. For those U-Boot's the wrapper is needed. More recent U-Boot
> > versions support passing a de
On Thu, 2009-03-12 at 09:05 +0100, Stefan Roese wrote:
>
> Both is possible. Older U-Boot versions only passed the bd_t struct to the
> kernel. For those U-Boot's the wrapper is needed. More recent U-Boot versions
> support passing a device-tree blob to the kernel. U-Boot patches the correct
>
On Thursday 12 March 2009, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> On Thu, 2009-03-12 at 07:02 +0100, Stefan Roese wrote:
> > I'll apply the U-Boot patch today. But as Josh pointed out, we should
> > try to
> > find a way for the bootwrapper to work in all cases.
>
> uboot is passing some kind of bt_t to t
On Thu, 2009-03-12 at 07:02 +0100, Stefan Roese wrote:
>
> I'll apply the U-Boot patch today. But as Josh pointed out, we should
> try to
> find a way for the bootwrapper to work in all cases.
uboot is passing some kind of bt_t to the wrapper or a full
device-tree ?
Ben.
_
On Thu, 2009-03-12 at 15:20 +0900, FISCHER Thierry wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am having some problem booting linux on Powerpc 405 (xilinx virtex4).
>
> I have the following output on the terminal:
> **
> zImage starting: loaded at 0x0040 (sp: 0x0
31 matches
Mail list logo
