Hi Kumar,
On Wed, 6 Apr 2011 00:29:32 -0500 Kumar Gala wrote:
>
> * I'm concerned if its ok to assume 'enum' can handle a 64-bit mask or not.
> I'm assuming this is the reason that we use a #define on __powerpc64__
enums are *ints* and therefore 32 bit. gcc can cope, but warns about it
(I th
The CPU_FTRS_POSSIBLE and CPU_FTRS_ALWAYS defines did not encompass
e5500 CPU features when built for 64-bit. This causes issues with
cpu_has_feature() as it utilizes the POSSIBLE & ALWAYS defines as part
of its check.
Signed-off-by: Kumar Gala
---
* I'm concerned if its ok to assume 'enum' can
On Apr 5, 2011, at 6:39 PM, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> On Tue, 2011-04-05 at 07:41 -0500, Kumar Gala wrote:
>>> Rework it to make it a bit clearer, and also correct. We want 3 save
>>> areas, each EX_TLB_SIZE _bytes_.
>>
>> Where does the 3 come from? I have a guess, and think its possible
> sdhci@2e000 {
> compatible = "fsl,mpc8536-esdhc", "fsl,esdhc";
> reg = <0x2e000 0x1000>;
> interrupts = <72 0x2>;
> interrupt-parent = <&mpic>;
> /* Filled in by U-Boot */
>
On Tue, 2011-04-05 at 07:41 -0500, Kumar Gala wrote:
> > Rework it to make it a bit clearer, and also correct. We want 3 save
> > areas, each EX_TLB_SIZE _bytes_.
>
> Where does the 3 come from? I have a guess, and think its possible we
> (FSL) want 4?
Wrong guess :-) It's not about exception le
Hello,
I have an 8308 using the fsl_elbc_nand NAND controller. I have
chip selects 2 & 3 hooked up to a single die multiple chip select NAND
chip. I have programmed u-boot and the kernel correctly and the
NAND "chips" are found:
NAND device: Manufacturer ID: 0xec, Chip ID: 0xd3 (Samsung NAND 1Gi
On Tue, 2011-04-05 at 08:49 -0700, Greg KH wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 05, 2011 at 04:58:47PM +0200, Michal Marek wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > this series makes it possible to build bit-identical kernel image and
> > modules from identical sources. Of course the build is already
> > deterministic in terms
On Tue, Apr 05, 2011 at 03:29:19PM -0300, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote:
> Em 05-04-2011 15:16, James Bottomley escreveu:
> > On Tue, 2011-04-05 at 08:49 -0700, Greg KH wrote:
> >> On Tue, Apr 05, 2011 at 04:58:47PM +0200, Michal Marek wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> this series makes it possible
Em Ter, 2011-04-05 às 21:02 +0200, Wolfram Sang escreveu:
> > Every idea or tip is apreciated.
>
> Please post your dts.
>
/*
* MPC8536 DS Device Tree Source
*
* Copyright 2008-2009 Freescale Semiconductor, Inc.
*
* This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify
it
*
> Every idea or tip is apreciated.
Please post your dts.
--
Pengutronix e.K. | Wolfram Sang|
Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
___
Hello,
I am working in a MPC8536e custom board. Our custom board has a slot to
SDCards conected to the MPC8536e's eSDHC controller. We are using just
4-serial data pins of eSDHC controller.
My kernel is 2.6.35.7 and I am using buildroot to build the root system
with uClib.
I can mount and read
Em 05-04-2011 15:16, James Bottomley escreveu:
> On Tue, 2011-04-05 at 08:49 -0700, Greg KH wrote:
>> On Tue, Apr 05, 2011 at 04:58:47PM +0200, Michal Marek wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> this series makes it possible to build bit-identical kernel image and
>>> modules from identical sources. Of course
On Tue, 2011-04-05 at 08:49 -0700, Greg KH wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 05, 2011 at 04:58:47PM +0200, Michal Marek wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > this series makes it possible to build bit-identical kernel image and
> > modules from identical sources. Of course the build is already
> > deterministic in terms
On Tue, Apr 05, 2011 at 04:58:47PM +0200, Michal Marek wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> this series makes it possible to build bit-identical kernel image and
> modules from identical sources. Of course the build is already
> deterministic in terms of behavior of the code, but the various
> timestamps embedded
On Tue, 5 Apr 2011 09:58:19 -0700
"Justin P. Mattock" wrote:
> The patch below removes an unused config variable found by using a kernel
> cleanup script.
> Note: I did try to cross compile these but hit erros while doing so..
> (gcc is not setup to cross compile) and am unsure if anymore needs t
The patch below removes an unused config variable found by using a kernel
cleanup script.
Note: I did try to cross compile these but hit erros while doing so..
(gcc is not setup to cross compile) and am unsure if anymore needs to be done.
Please have a look if/when anybody has free time.
Signed-of
The patch below removes an unused config variable found by using a kernel
cleanup script.
Note: I did try to cross compile these but hit erros while doing so..
(gcc is not setup to cross compile) and am unsure if anymore needs to be done.
Please have a look if/when anybody has free time.
Signed-of
Hi,
this series makes it possible to build bit-identical kernel image and
modules from identical sources. Of course the build is already
deterministic in terms of behavior of the code, but the various
timestamps embedded in the object files make it hard to compare two
builds, for instance to veri
Cc: Benjamin Herrenschmidt
Cc: Paul Mackerras
Cc: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
Signed-off-by: Michal Marek
---
arch/powerpc/boot/Makefile |2 +-
1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/powerpc/boot/Makefile b/arch/powerpc/boot/Makefile
index 8917816..d028a65 100
The timestamps recorded in the .gz files add no value.
Cc: Benjamin Herrenschmidt
Cc: Paul Mackerras
Cc: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
Signed-off-by: Michal Marek
---
arch/powerpc/boot/wrapper |6 +++---
1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/powerpc/boot/wrapp
On Apr 5, 2011, at 1:28 AM, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> The calculation of the size for the exception save area of the TLB
> miss handler is wrong, luckily it's too big not too small.
>
> Rework it to make it a bit clearer, and also correct. We want 3 save
> areas, each EX_TLB_SIZE _bytes_.
Where
On Wed, 2011-03-30 at 08:31 -0600, Grant Likely wrote:
> Yes, of_device_is_available() should be checked, but it should not be
> added directly to of_device_is_compatible(). I'm okay with adding
> a helper variant that does the of_device_is_compatible() check.
>
> In that particular case, I'd als
Hi Linus !
Some minor powerpc fixes for you, freescale device-tree updates
and a few nits like wrong ifdef's etc...
Cheers,
Ben.
The following changes since commit b2a8b4b81966094703088a7bc76a313af841924d:
Merge branch 'drm-fixes' of
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/airlied/drm
On Die, 2011-04-05 at 01:52 +0200, Gabriel Paubert wrote:
>
> Actually I thought that the name radeon_cp that is registered there
> would appear somwhere under /sys (or /proc) but failed to find it...
FWIW the radeon_cp* functions are in drivers/gpu/drm/radeon.
--
Earthling Michel Dänzer
There are a few places we patch instructions without using
patch_instruction and patch_branch, probably because they
predated it. Fix it.
Signed-off-by: Anton Blanchard
---
Index: powerpc.git/arch/powerpc/mm/hash_utils_64.c
===
-
On Tue, Apr 05, 2011 at 12:38:03PM +0530, Keshava Munegowda wrote:
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Sergei Shtylyov [mailto:sshtyl...@mvista.com]
> > Sent: Saturday, April 02, 2011 12:26 AM
> > To: Tirumala Marri
> > Cc: Keshava Munegowda; linux-...@vger.kernel.org;
> linuxppc-dev@lists.ozl
> -Original Message-
> From: Sergei Shtylyov [mailto:sshtyl...@mvista.com]
> Sent: Saturday, April 02, 2011 12:26 AM
> To: Tirumala Marri
> Cc: Keshava Munegowda; linux-...@vger.kernel.org;
linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org; g...@kroah.com;
> Fushen Chen; Mark Miesfeld
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v10
27 matches
Mail list logo
