Re: [RFC/PATCH 5/14] powerpc: Fix 440/440A machine check handling

2007-11-28 Thread Benjamin Herrenschmidt
On Wed, 2007-11-28 at 15:34 -0600, Olof Johansson wrote: > On Thu, Nov 22, 2007 at 07:05:25AM +1100, Benjamin Herrenschmidt > wrote: > > > > On Wed, 2007-11-21 at 13:51 -0600, Josh Boyer wrote: > > > > Hrm... it's per processor, not per board. I didn't feel like > digging > > > > which board uses

Re: [RFC/PATCH 5/14] powerpc: Fix 440/440A machine check handling

2007-11-28 Thread Olof Johansson
On Thu, Nov 22, 2007 at 07:05:25AM +1100, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > > On Wed, 2007-11-21 at 13:51 -0600, Josh Boyer wrote: > > > Hrm... it's per processor, not per board. I didn't feel like digging > > > which board uses which processor and go fixup all the ppc_md's > > > > Sounds like some

Re: [RFC/PATCH 5/14] powerpc: Fix 440/440A machine check handling

2007-11-21 Thread Benjamin Herrenschmidt
On Wed, 2007-11-21 at 13:51 -0600, Josh Boyer wrote: > > Hrm... it's per processor, not per board. I didn't feel like digging > > which board uses which processor and go fixup all the ppc_md's > > Sounds like something a generic function could probe for from the DTS. > I'll look at doing somethin

Re: [RFC/PATCH 5/14] powerpc: Fix 440/440A machine check handling

2007-11-21 Thread Josh Boyer
On Thu, 22 Nov 2007 06:48:50 +1100 Benjamin Herrenschmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Why didn't you just add a ppc_md.machine_check_exception to the > > effected boards? Then you could have gotten rid of the ifdefs all > > together. > > Hrm... it's per processor, not per board. I didn't f

Re: [RFC/PATCH 5/14] powerpc: Fix 440/440A machine check handling

2007-11-21 Thread Benjamin Herrenschmidt
> Why didn't you just add a ppc_md.machine_check_exception to the > effected boards? Then you could have gotten rid of the ifdefs all > together. Hrm... it's per processor, not per board. I didn't feel like digging which board uses which processor and go fixup all the ppc_md's Ben. __

Re: [RFC/PATCH 5/14] powerpc: Fix 440/440A machine check handling

2007-11-21 Thread Josh Boyer
On Wed, 21 Nov 2007 17:16:24 +1100 Benjamin Herrenschmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > This removes CONFIG_440A which was a problem for multiplatform > kernels and instead fixes up the IVOR at runtime from a setup_cpu > function. The "A" version of the machine check also tweaks the > regs->trap va

[RFC/PATCH 5/14] powerpc: Fix 440/440A machine check handling

2007-11-20 Thread Benjamin Herrenschmidt
This removes CONFIG_440A which was a problem for multiplatform kernels and instead fixes up the IVOR at runtime from a setup_cpu function. The "A" version of the machine check also tweaks the regs->trap value to differenciate the 2 versions at the C level. Signed-off-by: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <[E

[PATCH 5/14] powerpc: Fix 440/440A machine check handling

2007-11-20 Thread Benjamin Herrenschmidt
This removes CONFIG_440A which was a problem for multiplatform kernels and instead fixes up the IVOR at runtime from a setup_cpu function. The "A" version of the machine check also tweaks the regs->trap value to differenciate the 2 versions at the C level. Signed-off-by: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <[E