On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 09:23:38AM -0500, Timur Tabi wrote:
> I'm sorry, but Linux does depend on the boot loader,
In some ways, but we try not to do so too gratuitously.
> and U-Boot does need to know whether Linux is going to use 36-bit
> addressing.
U-Boot knows whether it puts things over 4G
Micha Nelissen wrote:
Do you mean like attached? I had to change the order of the '_GLOBAL'
definitions __setup_cpu_e500v1/__setup_cpu_e500v2 since this bit is
e500v2 only.
Hmm, maybe need to use r0 or r3 instead of r2?
Micha
Index: linux/arch/powerpc/kernel/cpu_setup_fsl_booke.S
Kumar Gala wrote:
+BEGIN_MMU_FTR_SECTION
+ mfspr r2,SPRN_HID0
+ ori r2,r2,hid0_en_mas7_upd...@l
+ mtspr SPRN_HID0, r2
+END_MMU_FTR_SECTION_IFSET(MMU_FTR_BIG_PHYS)
+#endif
If you want to do this, do it in:
arch/powerpc/kernel/cpu_setup_fsl_booke.S
Do you mean like at
On Jun 16, 2010, at 1:58 AM, Micha Nelissen wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Attached is a patch to fix large physical address support for the e500v2
> core. When >4GB addresses are used, the MAS7 register needs to be valid for
> tlbsx instruction usage.
>
> Please review and apply.
>
> Micha
> diff -u -ru
Timur Tabi wrote:
I'm sorry, but Linux does depend on the boot loader, and U-Boot does
need to know whether Linux is going to use 36-bit addressing.
Why?
That's
just the way it works.
What a great design philosophy!
Linux patches that repeat what U-Boot already
does just so that you do
On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 4:24 AM, Micha Nelissen wrote:
> IMHO:
> 1) Linux should not be dependent on U-boot or any other bootloader, or at
> least as possible
> 2) U-boot cannot (and does not want to) know whether Linux is going to use
> large physical addresses.
To quote The Dude: "Yeah, well,
> -Original Message-
> From: Micha Nelissen [mailto:mi...@neli.hopto.org]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 16, 2010 5:04 PM
> To: Aggrwal Poonam-B10812
> Cc: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] e500v2 36 bit large physical HID0[EN_MAS7_UPDATE]
>
> Agg
Aggrwal Poonam-B10812 wrote:
Not sure of other platforms but on 85xx platforms on which I am
currently working u-boot does LAW and eLBC programming for 36bit
physical address. Hence
possibly u-boot has to made aware of large physical address space.
Please correct me if I am wrong.
Yes, I can
> -Original Message-
> From: Micha Nelissen [mailto:mi...@neli.hopto.org]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 16, 2010 2:55 PM
> To: Aggrwal Poonam-B10812; linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] e500v2 36 bit large physical HID0[EN_MAS7_UPDATE]
>
> Aggrwa
Aggrwal Poonam-B10812 wrote:
Attached is a patch to fix large physical address support for the
This is already being done by u-boot, should linux set it again?
Yikes! Took me 5 min to reformat your email.
Our version of U-boot does not but it's not latest greatest.
IMHO:
1) Linux should not
-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
> Subject: [PATCH] e500v2 36 bit large physical HID0[EN_MAS7_UPDATE]
>
> Hi,
>
> Attached is a patch to fix large physical address support for the
e500v2
> core. When >4GB addresses are used, the MAS7 register needs to be
valid
> for tlbsx instruction
Hi,
Attached is a patch to fix large physical address support for the e500v2
core. When >4GB addresses are used, the MAS7 register needs to be valid
for tlbsx instruction usage.
Please review and apply.
Micha
diff -u -ru linux-2.6.34/arch/powerpc/include/asm/reg.h
linux-2.6.34-fix/arch/powe
12 matches
Mail list logo
