On Wed, 03 Mar 2010 11:13:52 +1100
Michael Ellerman wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-03-03 at 08:54 +0900, FUJITA Tomonori wrote:
> > Seems that IOMMU_VMERGE option description gives the false
> > information:
> >
> > http://marc.info/?l=linux-sparc&m=126753808727669&w=2
> > http://marc.info/?l=linux-sparc
On Wed, 2010-03-03 at 08:54 +0900, FUJITA Tomonori wrote:
> Seems that IOMMU_VMERGE option description gives the false
> information:
>
> http://marc.info/?l=linux-sparc&m=126753808727669&w=2
> http://marc.info/?l=linux-sparc&m=126753880528825&w=2
>
> IOMMU_VMERGE is unnecessary nowadays so how a
Hi all,
next-20100302 (and next-20100301) produce this log during boot on a
Power5 lpar.
calling .hvc_vio_init+0x0/0x34 @ 1
=
[ INFO: possible recursive locking detected ]
2.6.33-autokern1 #1
-
swapper/1 is
Seems that IOMMU_VMERGE option description gives the false
information:
http://marc.info/?l=linux-sparc&m=126753808727669&w=2
http://marc.info/?l=linux-sparc&m=126753880528825&w=2
IOMMU_VMERGE is unnecessary nowadays so how about removing it?
=
From: FUJITA Tomonori
Subject: [PATCH] powerpc: re
On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 8:27 AM, Paul Gortmaker
wrote:
> On 10-03-01 06:03 PM, v...@vsbe.com wrote:
>> sounds very much like this issue:
>>
>> http://linux.derkeiler.com/Mailing-Lists/Kernel/2010-02/msg09470.html
>
> Thanks for the link.
>
>>
>> (interrupt storm on the second port which is hit with
Hello,
I am running 2.6.31.4 on an MPC8313 (e300/PPC6xx core) platform running
OpenWRT. I am getting non-recoverable exceptions in random functions
shortly after I start profiling using OProfile (within a few minutes).
The exception usually happens in cpu_idle, but not always. The oops
usu
Hi Albrecht,
Thanks for this work, comment below...
On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 11:11 AM, Albrecht Dreß wrote:
> On the MPC5200B, select the baud rate prescaler as /4 by default to make very
> high baud rates (e.g. 3 MBaud) accessible and to achieve a higher precision
> for high baud rates in general
On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 1:56 AM, Albrecht Dreà wrote:
> Hi Wolfram:
>
> [snip]
>> > Yes, but I do all /calculations/ with the /4 prescaler for higher
>> accuracy.
>> > If the divisor exceeds the available 16 bits of the counter reg, I round
>> > (divisor / 8) to use the /32 prescaler. Â Think of a
On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 1:09 AM, Albrecht Dreà wrote:
>> > + Â /* Check only once if we are running on a mpc5200b or not */
>> > + Â if (is_mpc5200b == -1) {
>> > + Â Â Â Â Â struct device_node *np;
>> > +
>> > + Â Â Â Â Â np = of_find_compatible_node(NULL, NULL, "fsl,mpc5200b-immr");
On Tue, 2 Mar 2010, Albert Herranz wrote:
> > Currently "this URB doesn't require PIO" is always true, but in the
> > future it won't be.
> >
>
> Can this be currently tested?
Not yet, but soon. You can follow the gory details in this email
thread:
http://marc.info/?l=linux-usb&m=12
Alan Stern wrote:
> On Mon, 1 Mar 2010, Albert Herranz wrote:
>
>>> If transfer_buffer_length is 0 then do nothing.
>>> Otherwise if num_sgs > 0 then do nothing.
>>> Otherwise if URB_NO_TRANSFER_DMA_MAP and transfer_dma
>>> are both set (this avoids your HCD_NO_COHERENT_MEM
On 10-03-01 06:03 PM, v...@vsbe.com wrote:
> sounds very much like this issue:
>
> http://linux.derkeiler.com/Mailing-Lists/Kernel/2010-02/msg09470.html
Thanks for the link.
>
> (interrupt storm on the second port which is hit with breaks).
>
> It's not the uart driver problem per se, the belo
On Mon, 1 Mar 2010, Albert Herranz wrote:
> > If transfer_buffer_length is 0 then do nothing.
> > Otherwise if num_sgs > 0 then do nothing.
> > Otherwise if URB_NO_TRANSFER_DMA_MAP and transfer_dma
> > are both set (this avoids your HCD_NO_COHERENT_MEM
> > case)
This avoids storing these registers in memory.
CPU6 errata will still use the old way.
Remove some G2 leftover accesses from 2.4
Signed-off-by: Joakim Tjernlund
---
arch/powerpc/kernel/head_8xx.S | 49 +--
1 files changed, 36 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
Only the swap function cares about the ACCESSED bit in
the pte. Do not waste cycles updateting ACCESSED when swap
is not compiled into the kernel.
Signed-off-by: Joakim Tjernlund
---
arch/powerpc/kernel/head_8xx.S |6 --
1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch
This removes a couple of insn's from the TLB Miss
handlers whithout changing functionality.
Signed-off-by: Joakim Tjernlund
---
arch/powerpc/kernel/head_8xx.S | 11 +++
1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kernel/head_8xx.S b/arch/powerpc/kernel/h
Only modules will cause ITLB Misses as we always pin
the first 8MB of kernel memory.
Signed-off-by: Joakim Tjernlund
---
arch/powerpc/kernel/head_8xx.S |4
1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kernel/head_8xx.S b/arch/powerpc/kernel/head_8xx.S
inde
This set of tries to optimize the TLB code on 8xx even
more. If they work, it should be a noticable performance
boost.
I would be very happy if you could test them for me.
- v2:
Since Scott has done some testing of these patches I resend
them with my SOB.
Scott, can you "bless" these pa
> > > > This should be handled using a new compatible-entry
> > > > "fsl,mpc5200b-psc-uart".
> > >
> >
> > > I agree that this would be a lot cleaner, but it's also a lot more
> > intrusive.
> > > CC'ing the device tree discussion list here... comments, please!!
> >
> > Why intrusive? Maybe I m
On Tue, 2010-03-02 at 08:50 -0600, Kumar Gala wrote:
> On Mar 1, 2010, at 1:13 PM, Dave Kleikamp wrote:
>
> > powerpc/booke: Add Stack Marking support to Booke Exception Prolog
> >
> > From: Torez Smith
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Torez Smith
> > Signed-off-by: Dave Kleikamp
> > ---
> >
> > arch
On Mar 1, 2010, at 1:13 PM, Dave Kleikamp wrote:
> powerpc/booke: Add Stack Marking support to Booke Exception Prolog
>
> From: Torez Smith
>
> Signed-off-by: Torez Smith
> Signed-off-by: Dave Kleikamp
> ---
>
> arch/powerpc/kernel/head_booke.h |5 +
> 1 files changed, 5 insertions(
On Sat, 2010-02-27 at 21:21 +1100, Michael Neuling wrote:
> In message <11927.1267010...@neuling.org> you wrote:
> > > > If there's less the group will normally be balanced and we fall out and
> > > > end up in check_asym_packing().
> > > >
> > > > So what I tried doing with that loop is detect if
Hi!
On Sat, Feb 27, 2010 at 11:05:32AM +0530, Kumar Gopalpet-B05799 wrote:
[...]
> Understood, and thanks for the explanation. Am I correct in saying that
> this is
> due to the out-of-order execution capability on powerpc ?
Nope, that was just a logic issue in the driver.
Though, with the patc
Hi,
I'm running linux-2.6.33 on a custom board based on 460EX.
There's a PCI-PCI bridge on this board, PLX 6254, and a single
hot-pluggable device behind the bridge.
When this device is plugged in before system boots everything works
fine: bridge and device are properly recognized by kernel, res
Hi Wolfram:
[snip]
> > Yes, but I do all /calculations/ with the /4 prescaler for higher
> accuracy.
> > If the divisor exceeds the available 16 bits of the counter reg, I round
> > (divisor / 8) to use the /32 prescaler. Think of a 19-bit counter value,
> > where I can choose to use either the l
> [snip]
> > > + if (is_mpc5200b == 1)
> > > + return mpc5xxx_get_bus_frequency(p) * 4;
> > > + else
> > > + return mpc5xxx_get_bus_frequency(p) / 2;
> >
> > Isn't this wrong? You can also have /32 on the 5200B (the fallback).
>
> Yes, but I do all /calculations/ with the /4 presc
Hi Wolfram!
Thanks a lot for your comments!
[snip]
> > + * as the chip can be only either a 5200B or not. */
> > +static int is_mpc5200b = -1;
> > +
> > +
>
> One empty line too much. Maybe we can also get rid of the static later in
> the
> process, but first things first.
Ooops
[snip]
> >
27 matches
Mail list logo
