On Fri, 2009-08-14 at 22:57 +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> On Fri, 2009-08-14 at 12:49 -0700, David Miller wrote:
> > From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt
> > Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2009 17:56:40 +1000
> >
> > > On Thu, 2009-08-13 at 16:40 +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> > >> On Thu, 2009-08-13 at 13:01 +100
Hi all,
I am trying to port linux 2.6.30 for my TSI108 based custom board
where i am getting the following kernel panic message. I found that it was
due to dma allocation function call particularly dma_alloc_coherent() of
tsi108_open function. When we see the implementation of dma_alloc_cohe
Hi all,
I am trying to port linux 2.6.30 for my TSI108 based custom board
where i am getting the following kernel panic message. I found that it was
due to dma allocation function call particularly dma_alloc_coherent() of
tsi108_open function. When we see the implementation of dma_alloc_coher
On Thursday 20 August 2009 06:38:51 Sean MacLennan wrote:
> > I see other boards using SMC as well, can someone comment on the
> > change I am proposing.
> > Should I change the correction algorithm or the calculate function?
> > If the later is preferred
> > it would mean the change must be pushed
Ok so due to screwup mentioned earlier, it's rebased agian :-(
Hopefully that's the last time for very looong...
While at it, I removed the lmb kmemleak patch from Michael since
we decided it wasn't a good idea and added Kumar's fix for
assert_pte_locked().
I also updated the test branch wit
On Wed, 19 Aug 2009 16:16:54 -0700
Feng Kan wrote:
> I see other boards using SMC as well, can someone comment on the
> change I am proposing.
> Should I change the correction algorithm or the calculate function?
> If the later is preferred
> it would mean the change must be pushed in both U-Boot
On Thu, 2009-08-13 at 10:15 +0200, Michel Dänzer wrote:
> On Thu, 2009-08-13 at 17:05 +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> > On Tue, 2009-08-04 at 23:51 +0200, Michel Dänzer wrote:
> > > From: Michel Dänzer
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Michel Dänzer
> > > ---
> >
> > Hi Michel !
> >
> > While
On Wed, 2009-08-19 at 16:37 -0500, Kumar Gala wrote:
> On Aug 19, 2009, at 2:25 AM, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> The whole thing only ever gets called if we had tlbsrx. so is there
> any utility in making a part of conditional on tlbsrx?
I don't think so ... this is the second level TLB miss
Hi All:
It seems that the ECC correction is broken on the Linux with the 4xx
NDFC driver.
It uses the SMC order when reading the ECC code. 2-1-3
static int ndfc_calculate_ecc(struct mtd_info *mtd,
const u_char *dat, u_char *ecc_code)
{
struct ndfc_controll
On Wed, 2009-08-19 at 15:59 -0500, Becky Bruce wrote:
> On Aug 18, 2009, at 5:33 PM, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
>
> >
> FYI, I pulled your updated test branch this morning, booted, and did a
> full LTP run on 8572. The results are consistent with the baseline I
> have, so it looks like th
On Wed, 2009-08-19 at 08:43 -0500, Kumar Gala wrote:
>
> You screwed it up... :)
>
> The commits you pulled in from me you seem to have changed the
> author
> of the commits which is NOT cool at all. Adding signed-off-by is
> good, changing the committer is ok, but changing the author of the
On Aug 19, 2009, at 2:25 AM, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
On Wed, 2009-08-19 at 00:08 -0500, Kumar Gala wrote:
Support for TLB reservation (or TLB Write Conditional) and Paired MAS
registers are optional for a processor implementation so we handle
them via MMU feature sections.
We currently
On Aug 18, 2009, at 5:33 PM, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
On Tue, 2009-08-18 at 16:56 -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
On Fri, Aug 14, 2009 at 05:39:42PM -0500, Becky Bruce wrote:
Ben,
This breaks the boot on 8572. I don't know why yet (and I'm
probably
not going to figure it out before I go hom
On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 04:52:20PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, 18 Aug 2009, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> >
> > > The thing is, some people may assert that a lock is held, but others
> > > could
> > > easily be looping until it's not held using something like
> > >
> > > while (spin
On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 01:01:16PM +, Sumesh Kaana wrote:
>
>
>
>Hi all,
>I am trying to boot linux kernel (2.6.30) on a custom built board.I am using
>simple ppc platform and attached are my dts file and boot log..
>I've 16Mb of RAM,UART and UIC with powerpc 440x5 processor.Kernel Image size
Hi all,
I am trying to boot linux kernel (2.6.30) on a custom built board.I am using
simple ppc platform and attached are my dts file and boot log..
I've 16Mb of RAM,UART and UIC with powerpc 440x5 processor.Kernel Image size is
less than 1 mb.
i am not using any bootloaders such as U-b
* Arun R Bharadwaj [2009-08-19 18:27:16]:
This patch creates the Thermal & Power Management Devices module, tpmd_idle
which implements the cpuidle infrasture for pseries.
It implements a tpmd_idle_loop() which would be the main idle loop called
from cpu_idle(). It makes decision of entering eithe
* Arun R Bharadwaj [2009-08-19 18:27:16]:
This patch enables the cpuidle option in Kconfig for pSeries.
It also adds the routine cpu_idle_wait.
Signed-off-by: Arun R Bharadwaj
---
arch/powerpc/Kconfig | 18 ++
arch/powerpc/include/asm/system.h |2 ++
Hi,
RFC not for inclusion
"Cpuidle" is a CPU Power Management infrastrusture which helps manage
idle CPUs in a clean and efficient manner. The architecture can register
its driver (in this case, tpmd_idle driver) so that it subscribes for
cpuidle feature. Cpuidle has a set of governors
On Aug 19, 2009, at 8:54 AM, Kumar Gala wrote:
On Aug 19, 2009, at 8:43 AM, Kumar Gala wrote:
On Aug 19, 2009, at 2:33 AM, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
Allright it's done, let's hope I didn't screw up :-)
You screwed it up... :)
The commits you pulled in from me you seem to have chang
The ptrace POKETEXT interface allows a process to modify the text pages of
a child process being ptraced, usually to insert breakpoints via trap
instructions. The kernel eventually calls copy_to_user_page, which in turn
calls __flush_icache_range to invalidate the icache lines for the child
proces
Hello,
I'm confused by the modalias'es created by OF devices, e.g.:
# cat /sys/devices/f000.soc5200/ff00.spi/modalias
of:NspiTCfsl,mpc5200b-spiCfsl,mpc5200-spi
First of all, the string "" looks like an error.
I could then dynamically load a driver module for the SPI using:
# mo
On Aug 19, 2009, at 8:43 AM, Kumar Gala wrote:
On Aug 19, 2009, at 2:33 AM, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
Allright it's done, let's hope I didn't screw up :-)
You screwed it up... :)
The commits you pulled in from me you seem to have changed the
author of the commits which is NOT cool a
On Aug 19, 2009, at 2:33 AM, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
Allright it's done, let's hope I didn't screw up :-)
You screwed it up... :)
The commits you pulled in from me you seem to have changed the author
of the commits which is NOT cool at all. Adding signed-off-by is
good, changing t
On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 09:30:20AM -0400, Michael Barkowski wrote:
> Anton Vorontsov wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 05:33:00PM -0500, Timur Tabi wrote:
> >> Anton Vorontsov wrote:
> >>> On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 05:20:44PM -0400, Michael Barkowski wrote:
> This avoids having a short glitch i
Anton Vorontsov wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 05:33:00PM -0500, Timur Tabi wrote:
>> Anton Vorontsov wrote:
>>> On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 05:20:44PM -0400, Michael Barkowski wrote:
This avoids having a short glitch if the desired initial value is not
the same as what was previously in th
This patch adds support for the Xilinx Ethernet Lite device. The
soft logic core from Xilinx is typically used on Virtex and Spartan
designs attached to either a PowerPC or a Microblaze processor.
CC: Grant Likely
CC: Josh Boyer
CC: John Williams
CC: Michal Simek
Signed-off-by: Sadanand M
Si
On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 09:45:13AM +0800, tiejun.chen wrote:
>Josh Boyer wrote:
>> On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 10:28:02AM +0800, Tiejun Chen wrote:
>>> Summary: powerpc/405ex: Support cuImage for PPC405EX
>>> Reviewers: Benjmain and linux-ppc
>>>
>>>
Hello,
On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 12:53 PM, Alan Cox wrote:
> On Wed, 19 Aug 2009 10:38:06 +0100
>
> in drivers because there is driver code that uses spin_is_locked() in
> fairly sensible fashion when dealing with locking.
>
One use is to measure lock contention hits on a particular spin lock.
How
On Wed, 2009-08-19 at 13:16 +0200, Leon Woestenberg wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 12:53 PM, Alan Cox wrote:
> > On Wed, 19 Aug 2009 10:38:06 +0100
> >
> > in drivers because there is driver code that uses spin_is_locked() in
> > fairly sensible fashion when dealing with locking.
> >
On Wed, 19 Aug 2009 10:38:06 +0100
David Howells wrote:
> Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>
> > > which implies to me that spin_is_locked() will always return false. Is
> > > this
> > > expected behavior.
> >
> > That's wrong. spin_is_locked should always return true on UP.
>
> Surely it's not that
Hi all,
In my custom board the flash memory was 64 bit data size means two 32
bit flash chips are combined together to form as 64 bit bus width. Is there
any patch to use the flash memory in mtd layer on the linux-2.6 kernel.
Because on kernel there is no support for 64 bit read/write on the
On Wed, 2009-08-19 at 10:38 +0100, David Howells wrote:
> Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>
> > > which implies to me that spin_is_locked() will always return false. Is
> > > this
> > > expected behavior.
> >
> > That's wrong. spin_is_locked should always return true on UP.
>
> Surely it's not that si
On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 07:40:16PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, 18 Aug 2009, Kumar Gala wrote:
> >
> > I agree its a little too easy to abuse spin_is_locked. However we should be
> > consistent between spin_is_locked on UP between with and without
> > CONFIG_DEBUG_SPINLOCK enabled
Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > which implies to me that spin_is_locked() will always return false. Is this
> > expected behavior.
>
> That's wrong. spin_is_locked should always return true on UP.
Surely it's not that simple? Maybe spin_is_lock() should be undefined on UP.
David
_
On Wed, 2009-08-19 at 11:31 +0200, Olivier Galibert wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 07:40:16PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Tue, 18 Aug 2009, Kumar Gala wrote:
> > >
> > > I agree its a little too easy to abuse spin_is_locked. However we should
> > > be
> > > consistent between
> -Original Message-
> From: Stephen Hemminger [mailto:shemmin...@vyatta.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2009 10:04 PM
> To: John Linn
> Cc: net...@vger.kernel.org; linuxppc-...@ozlabs.org;
jgar...@pobox.com; da...@davemloft.net; John
> Linn; grant.lik...@secretlab.ca; Josh Boyer; John Wil
Allright it's done, let's hope I didn't screw up :-)
So I rebased the whole thing on top of latest upstream, fixing along the
way the bug that Becky found in tlb.h and fixing up a commit name from
Kumar that was referencing the wrong board. I also applied to -next the
remaining things that were in
On Mon, 2009-08-17 at 09:41 -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
> The ptrace POKETEXT interface allows a process to modify the text pages of
> a child process being ptraced, usually to insert breakpoints via trap
> instructions. The kernel eventually calls copy_to_user_page, which in turn
> calls __flush_ica
On Wed, 2009-08-19 at 00:08 -0500, Kumar Gala wrote:
> Support for TLB reservation (or TLB Write Conditional) and Paired MAS
> registers are optional for a processor implementation so we handle
> them via MMU feature sections.
>
> We currently only used paired MAS registers to access the full RPN
Thanks David, I may have got over zealous in my clean up to get it ready
for mainline.
I'll take care of that.
-- John
> -Original Message-
> From: David Miller [mailto:da...@davemloft.net]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 19, 2009 7:28 AM
> To: John Linn
> Cc: net...@vger.kernel.org; linuxppc-
41 matches
Mail list logo
