On Thu, 2013-04-18 at 13:33 +0800, Gavin Shan wrote:
> The firmware should have supplied correct information for the kernel
> to figure out the page size array, which is traced by mmu_psize_defs[].
> Otherwise, the kernel will fail back to use solely 4KB page size
> and copy mmu_psize_defaults_old[
On Wed, 2013-04-17 at 12:44 -0600, Chris Friesen wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm trying to wrap my head around how linux handles branch tracing on
> Book III-E. I think I understand how we set MSR[DE] and DBCR0[IDM|BT],
> and how we handle fixing things up if an instruction being traced causes
> an excep
On Mon, Apr 08, 2013 at 11:05:50AM -0300, Adhemerval Zanella wrote:
> On 04/05/2013 03:21 AM, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 04:55:31PM -0300, Adhemerval Zanella wrote:
> >> Hi all,
> >>
> >> This patch implement the time syscall as vDSO. I have a glibc patch
> >> to use it as
The firmware should have supplied correct information for the kernel
to figure out the page size array, which is traced by mmu_psize_defs[].
Otherwise, the kernel will fail back to use solely 4KB page size
and copy mmu_psize_defaults_old[] over to mmu_psize_defs[]. However,
the "tlbiel" isn't enabl
irq_eoi() is already called by generic_handle_irq() so
it shall not be called a again
Signed-off-by: Christophe Leroy
Index: linux/arch/powerpc/platforms/8xx/m8xx_setup.c
===
--- linux/arch/powerpc/platforms/8xx/m8xx_setup.c
Hello Maintainers:
in arch/powerpc/kernel/lparcfg.c, parse_system_parameter_string()
need set '\0' for 'local_buffer'.
the reason is:
SPLPAR_MAXLENGTH is 1026, RTAS_DATA_BUF_SIZE is 4096
the contents of rtas_data_buf may truncated in memcpy (line 301).
if contents are truncated
akpm,
If you're happy with this, is it something you can take in your tree?
Mikey
Michael Neuling wrote:
> We are currently out of free bits in AT_HWCAP. With POWER8, we have
> several hardware features that we need to advertise.
>
> Tested on POWER and x86.
>
> Signed-off-by: Michael Neulin
We are currently out of free bits in AT_HWCAP. With POWER8, we have
several hardware features that we need to advertise.
Tested on POWER and x86.
Signed-off-by: Michael Neuling
Signed-off-by: Nishanth Aravamudan
---
> Wouldn't it be safer to not emit AT_HWCAP2 unless it is defined by the arch
I am out of the office until 24/04/2013.
Note: This is an automated response to your message "Linuxppc-dev Digest,
Vol 104, Issue 108" sent on 17/04/2013 21:17:28.
This is the only notification you will receive while this person is away.
___
Linux
On 04/17/2013 05:37 PM, Anshuman Khandual wrote:
> On 04/17/2013 12:38 PM, Michael Ellerman wrote:
>> On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 09:24:10PM +0530, Anshuman Khandual wrote:
>>> This patch provides basic enablement for perf branch stack sampling
>>> framework
>>> on POWER8 processor with a new PMU feat
On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 05:31:58PM +0800, Li Zhong wrote:
> I'm not sure whether it makes sense to add this dependency to avoid
> CONFI_NUMA && !CONFIG_SMP.
>
> I want to do this because I saw some build errors on next-tree when
> compiling with CONFIG_SMP disabled, and it seems they are caused b
irq_eoi() is already called by generic_handle_irq() so
it shall not be called a again
Signed-off-by: Christophe Leroy
Index: linux/arch/powerpc/platforms/8xx/m8xx_setup.c
===
--- linux/arch/powerpc/platforms/8xx/m8xx_setup.c
On 04/17/2013 12:44 PM, Chris Friesen wrote:
Hi,
I'm trying to wrap my head around how linux handles branch tracing on
Book III-E. I think I understand how we set MSR[DE] and DBCR0[IDM|BT],
and how we handle fixing things up if an instruction being traced causes
an exception.
While poking arou
On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 10:52 PM, Timur Tabi wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 9:57 AM, Grant Likely
> wrote:
>>
>>> I really preciate if you can spend some times to review this patch.
>>
>> Applied, thanks.
>
> Pff. Why do I bother?
Relax Timur:
http://git.secretlab.ca/?p=linux.git;a=commitdi
On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 9:57 AM, Grant Likely wrote:
>
>> I really preciate if you can spend some times to review this patch.
>
> Applied, thanks.
Pff. Why do I bother?
___
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
https://lists.ozlabs.or
On Wed, 20 Mar 2013 18:41:53 +0100
Matteo Facchinetti wrote:
> MPC5125 PSC controller has different registers than MPC5121.
>
> This patch was originally created by Vladimir Ermakov
> https://lists.ozlabs.org/pipermail/linuxppc-dev/2011-March/088954.html
>
> Signed-off-by: Vladimir Ermakov
>
From: Matteo Facchinetti
MPC5125 PSC controller has different register layout than MPC5121.
To support MPC5125 PSC in this driver we have to provide further
psc_ops functions for SoC specific register accesses.
Add new register access functions to the psc_ops structure and
provide MPC52xx and MP
From: Matteo Facchinetti
Add MPC5125 PSC register layout structure, MPC5125 specific
psc_ops function set and the compatible string.
Signed-off-by: Vladimir Ermakov
Signed-off-by: Matteo Facchinetti
Signed-off-by: Anatolij Gustschin
---
Changes in v2:
- split into two patches to simplify rev
On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 2:17 PM, Alex Deucher wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 4:11 PM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
>> On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 2:04 PM, Alex Deucher wrote:
>>> On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 8:38 AM, Lucas Kannebley Tavares
>>> wrote:
On 04/12/2013 01:38 PM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
>
>>
On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 4:11 PM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 2:04 PM, Alex Deucher wrote:
>> On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 8:38 AM, Lucas Kannebley Tavares
>> wrote:
>>> On 04/12/2013 01:38 PM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 7:13 AM, Lucas Kannebley Tavares
>
On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 2:04 PM, Alex Deucher wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 8:38 AM, Lucas Kannebley Tavares
> wrote:
>> On 04/12/2013 01:38 PM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
>>>
>>> On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 7:13 AM, Lucas Kannebley Tavares
>>> wrote:
radeon currently uses a drm function to
On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 8:38 AM, Lucas Kannebley Tavares
wrote:
> On 04/12/2013 01:38 PM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 7:13 AM, Lucas Kannebley Tavares
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> radeon currently uses a drm function to get the speed capabilities for
>>> the bus. However, this is a n
Hi,
I'm trying to wrap my head around how linux handles branch tracing on
Book III-E. I think I understand how we set MSR[DE] and DBCR0[IDM|BT],
and how we handle fixing things up if an instruction being traced causes
an exception.
I have a few questions though:
1) Does user_enable_block_s
On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 05:17:48PM +0100, Grant Likely wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 5:10 PM, Jason Cooper wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 05:00:15PM +0100, Grant Likely wrote:
> >> On Tue, 16 Apr 2013 11:30:06 +0100, Andrew Murray
> >> wrote:
> >> > On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 11:18:26AM +010
On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 5:10 PM, Jason Cooper wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 05:00:15PM +0100, Grant Likely wrote:
>> On Tue, 16 Apr 2013 11:30:06 +0100, Andrew Murray
>> wrote:
>> > On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 11:18:26AM +0100, Andrew Murray wrote:
>> > > The pci_process_bridge_OF_ranges function
On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 05:00:15PM +0100, Grant Likely wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Apr 2013 11:30:06 +0100, Andrew Murray
> wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 11:18:26AM +0100, Andrew Murray wrote:
> > > The pci_process_bridge_OF_ranges function, used to parse the "ranges"
> > > property of a PCI host de
On Tue, 16 Apr 2013 11:30:06 +0100, Andrew Murray wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 11:18:26AM +0100, Andrew Murray wrote:
> > The pci_process_bridge_OF_ranges function, used to parse the "ranges"
> > property of a PCI host device, is found in both Microblaze and PowerPC
> > architectures. These im
On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 12:18 PM, Andrew Murray wrote:
> This patch converts the pci_load_of_ranges function to use the new common
> of_pci_range_parser.
>
> Signed-off-by: Andrew Murray
> Signed-off-by: Liviu Dudau
> Reviewed-by: Rob Herring
Tested-by: Linus Walleij
Yours,
Linus Walleij
__
On Wed, 17 Apr 2013, Shengzhou Liu wrote:
> We remove the redundant tdi_reset in ehci_setup since there
> is already it in ehci_reset.
> It was observed that the duplicated tdi_reset was causing
> the PHY_CLK_VALID bit unstable.
>
> Signed-off-by: Shengzhou Liu
> ---
> drivers/usb/host/ehci-hcd
On Tue, 16 Apr 2013 06:54:40 +, Tang Yuantian-B29983
wrote:
> Hi Grant.likely,
>
> I really preciate if you can spend some times to review this patch.
Applied, thanks.
g.
___
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
https://lists.o
On 04/15/2013 08:42 AM, Michael Ellerman wrote:
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 10:13:13AM -0300, Lucas Kannebley Tavares wrote:
On pseries machines the detection for max_bus_speed should be done
through an OpenFirmware property. This patch adds a function to perform this
detection and a hook to perform
On 04/15/2013 02:00 AM, Michael Ellerman wrote:
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 10:13:13AM -0300, Lucas Kannebley Tavares wrote:
On pseries machines the detection for max_bus_speed should be done
through an OpenFirmware property. This patch adds a function to perform this
detection and a hook to perform
On 04/12/2013 01:38 PM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 7:13 AM, Lucas Kannebley Tavares
wrote:
radeon currently uses a drm function to get the speed capabilities for
the bus. However, this is a non-standard method of performing this
detection and this patch changes it to use the
On 2013-04-17 05:46, Luo Zhenhua-B19537 wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Michael Ellerman [mailto:mich...@ellerman.id.au]
Sent: Monday, April 15, 2013 1:02 PM
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 09:56:30PM +0800, Zhenhua Luo wrote:
When using recent udev, the /dev node mount requires
CONFIG_DEVTMPFS
On 04/17/2013 12:38 PM, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 09:24:10PM +0530, Anshuman Khandual wrote:
>> This patch provides basic enablement for perf branch stack sampling framework
>> on POWER8 processor with a new PMU feature called BHRB (Branch History
>> Rolling
>> Buffer).
>>
> -Original Message-
> From: Michael Ellerman [mailto:mich...@ellerman.id.au]
> Sent: Monday, April 15, 2013 1:02 PM
>
> On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 09:56:30PM +0800, Zhenhua Luo wrote:
> > When using recent udev, the /dev node mount requires
> > CONFIG_DEVTMPFS_MOUNT is enabled in Kernel.
>
Tang Yuantian-B29983 wrote:
It was placed on ELSE statement originally, I moved it to IF statement.
Why is it so wrong?
Because the logic of the comment applies to the else-condition, not the
if-condtion.
--
Timur Tabi
___
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
We remove the redundant tdi_reset in ehci_setup since there
is already it in ehci_reset.
It was observed that the duplicated tdi_reset was causing
the PHY_CLK_VALID bit unstable.
Signed-off-by: Shengzhou Liu
---
drivers/usb/host/ehci-hcd.c |3 ---
1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 3 deletion
Previously in order to handle the edge sensitive decrementers,
we choose to set the decrementer to 1 to trigger a decrementer
interrupt when re-enabling interrupts. But with the rework of the
lazy EE, we would replay the decrementer interrupt when re-enabling
interrupts if a decrementer interrupt o
On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 09:24:10PM +0530, Anshuman Khandual wrote:
> This patch provides basic enablement for perf branch stack sampling framework
> on POWER8 processor with a new PMU feature called BHRB (Branch History Rolling
> Buffer).
>
> Signed-off-by: Anshuman Khandual
> ---
> arch/powerpc
40 matches
Mail list logo
