Use of_get_next_parent() in xics_setup_8259_cascade() to simplify
the loop logic.
Signed-off-by: Michael Ellerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/xics.c |9 +++--
1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/xics.c
b
Use of_get_next_parent() in pseries_mpic_init_IRQ() to simplify
the loop logic.
Signed-off-by: Michael Ellerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/setup.c |9 +++--
1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/setup.c
b
We can use of_get_next_parent() in two places in axon_msi.c to
simplify the looping logic.
Signed-off-by: Michael Ellerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
arch/powerpc/platforms/cell/axon_msi.c |6 +++---
1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/powerpc/platforms/cell/axon_
We should use of_get_next_child() in the EEH gather_pci_data()
routine to safely traverse the node's children.
Signed-off-by: Michael Ellerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/eeh.c |4 +---
1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/powerpc/plat
We should use of_get_next_child() in the eeh_restore_bars()
routine to safely traverse the node's children.
Signed-off-by: Michael Ellerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/eeh.c |5 +
1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/powerpc/platfo
We should use of_get_next_child() in the eeh_add_device_tree_early()
routine to safely traverse the node's children.
Signed-off-by: Michael Ellerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/eeh.c |2 +-
1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/powerpc/
We should use of_get_next_child() in print_device_node_tree() to safely
traverse the node's children.
Signed-off-by: Michael Ellerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/eeh_driver.c |6 ++
1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/powerpc/plat
We should use of_get_next_child() in eeh_reset_device() to safely
traverse the node's children.
Signed-off-by: Michael Ellerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
Linas, I don't grok the logic in here, can you check it's OK. The old code
would potentially not walk through all siblings if pe_dn->node was no
pci_dma_bus_setup_pSeries() should use of_get_next_child() to safely
iterate through the nodes children.
Signed-off-by: Michael Ellerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/iommu.c |2 +-
1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/powerpc/platforms/
We should use of_get_next_child() in __eeh_mark_slot() to safely
traverse the node's children.
To achieve this we need to change __eeh_mark_slot() to take the parent
node, not the child. This is also safer, as passing anything other than
node->child to the existing routine will not traverse all pe
We should use of_get_next_child() in __eeh_clear_slot() to safely
traverse the node's children.
To achieve this we need to change __eeh_clear_slot() to take the parent
node, not the child. This is also safer, as passing anything other than
node->child to the existing routine will not traverse all
On Fri, 26 Oct 2007 16:54:41 +1000 (EST) Michael Ellerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/platforms/cell/axon_msi.c
> @@ -125,7 +125,7 @@ static struct axon_msic *find_msi_translator(struct
> pci_dev *dev)
> return NULL;
> }
>
> - for (; dn; tmp = of_ge
On Fri, 26 Oct 2007 16:54:43 +1000 (EST) Michael Ellerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/eeh.c
> @@ -841,11 +841,8 @@ void eeh_restore_bars(struct pci_dn *pdn)
> if ((pdn->eeh_mode & EEH_MODE_SUPPORTED) && !IS_BRIDGE(pdn->class_code))
> __re
Hi Jocke,
On Wed, 24 Oct 2007 23:06:13 +0200, Tjernlund wrote:
> While browsing the i2c-mpc.c driver I noticed some things that look odd
> to me so I figured I report them. Could not find a maintainer in the
> MAINTANERS file
> so I sent here, cc:ed linuxppc-dev as well.
>
> 1) There are a lot o
On Monday 22 October 2007 16:04:14, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote：
> > Yup, I've found how does the kernel handle tlbs, I think the most
> > important thing is I forgot read/write the SPRN_SPRG3 register as _switch
> > does.
>
> SPRG3 is for use by the operating system for whatever you want... if yo
From: Michael Ellerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2007 16:54:31 +1000 (EST)
> Iterating through a device node's parents is simple enough, but dealing
> with the refcounts properly is a little ugly, and replicating that logic
> is asking for someone to get it wrong or forget it all toget
On Fri, 2007-10-26 at 11:53 +0200, Jean Delvare wrote:
> Hi Jocke,
>
> On Wed, 24 Oct 2007 23:06:13 +0200, Tjernlund wrote:
> > While browsing the i2c-mpc.c driver I noticed some things that look odd
> > to me so I figured I report them. Could not find a maintainer in the
> > MAINTANERS file
> >
Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-10-25 at 22:16 +0400, Valentine Barshak wrote:
>> PowerPC 440EP(x) 440GR(x) processors have the same PVR values, since
>> they have identical cores. However, FPU is not supported on GR(x) and
>> enabling APU instruction broadcast in the CCR0 register (to
eHEA resources that are allocated via H_CALLs have a unique identifier each.
These identifiers are necessary to free the resources. A reboot notifier
is used to free all eHEA resources before the indentifiers get lost, i.e
before kexec starts a new kernel.
Signed-off-by: Jan-Bernd Themann <[EMAIL
Rework ohci-ppc-of driver to use big-endian property instead of
ohci-be/ohci-le compatible strings. Also remove unnecessary
user-selectable USB_OHCI_HCD_PPC_OF_LE/BE stuff, because
USB_OHCI_BIG_ENDIAN_DESC/MMIO should always be enabled for ppc
and USB_OHCI_LITTLE_ENDIAN is selected for USB_OHCI_HCD
On Fri, 2007-10-26 at 15:05 +0400, Valentine Barshak wrote:
>
> It's not enough. We need to enable APU instruction broadcast for
> EP(x)
> (call __init_fpu_44x in arch/powerpc/kernel/cpu_setup_44x.S).
> Or do you suggest to or-in FPU feature bit and enable APUIB later,
> not
> in the cpu_setup
Matt Sealey wrote:
> Valentine Barshak wrote:
>> Matt Sealey wrote:
>>> Compatible property on /[EMAIL PROTECTED]/[EMAIL PROTECTED] is
>>
>> We should also keep "ohci-bigendian" and "ohci-be" in the match table.
>
> Eh.. maybe.
>
>>> I am currently moving on the assumption that the "correct" devi
Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> On Fri, 2007-10-26 at 15:05 +0400, Valentine Barshak wrote:
>> It's not enough. We need to enable APU instruction broadcast for
>> EP(x)
>> (call __init_fpu_44x in arch/powerpc/kernel/cpu_setup_44x.S).
>> Or do you suggest to or-in FPU feature bit and enable APUIB l
Hello!
I have at compile time the following warning:
WARNING: vmlinux.o(.text+0x10f5c): Section mismatch: reference
to .init.text:cpm_muram_init (between 'cpm2_reset' and
'cpm2_smc_clk_setup')
Could it make some problem?
Thanks.
--
Sergej I. Stepanov
IDS GmbH
Nobelstr. 18, Zim. 2.1.05
D-76275
So, like, the other day David Gibson mumbled:
>
> Ah... I think I see the source of our misunderstanding. Sorry if I
> was unclear. I'm not saying that the version token would be
> invisible to the parser, just that it would be recognized by the lexer
> first.
Ah! Right. OK, I see what you are
On Fri, Oct 26, 2007 at 08:07:49AM -0500, Jon Loeliger wrote:
> So, like, the other day David Gibson mumbled:
> >
> > Ah... I think I see the source of our misunderstanding. Sorry if I
> > was unclear. I'm not saying that the version token would be
> > invisible to the parser, just that it would
On Fri, Oct 26, 2007 at 01:59:09PM +0200, Domen Puncer wrote:
> +static irqreturn_t mpc52xx_fec_tx_interrupt(int irq, void *dev_id)
> +{
> + struct net_device *dev = dev_id;
> + struct mpc52xx_fec_priv *priv = netdev_priv(dev);
> +
> + spin_lock(&priv->lock);
> +
> + while (bcom_buf
On Oct 25, 2007, at 10:51 PM, Surya Ravikiran wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am trying to bootup a Linux kernel, on a FS eval board with 256M.
> I pass the kernel argument mem=252M, and see that the kernel boots up
> fine, but with much less memory, ~192M (the closes 64M multiple), and
> I browsed through th
On Oct 26, 2007, at 8:25 AM, Sergej Stepanov wrote:
> Hello!
>
> I have at compile time the following warning:
>
> WARNING: vmlinux.o(.text+0x10f5c): Section mismatch: reference
> to .init.text:cpm_muram_init (between 'cpm2_reset' and
> 'cpm2_smc_clk_setup')
>
> Could it make some problem?
It sh
On 10/25/07, Benjamin Berg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-25-10 at 15:23 +0200, Johannes Berg wrote:
> > On Wed, 2007-10-24 at 10:29 -0400, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> >
> > > Do yo know who has powerbooks with older geyser models (0x214, 215,
> > > 216)?
> >
> > Not sure, Benjamin? We're t
This adds device-tree aware PowerPC 44x NDFC (NAND Flash Controller) driver.
The code is based on the original ndfc.c driver by Thomas Gleixner.
The major difference is that here we try to handle all chips found as one mtd
device instead of having a separate one on each chip.
The partition handling
NDFC (NAND Flash Controller) DTS entry for PowerPC 440EPx Sequoia board.
The NDFC is relocatable in EBC space.
Signed-off-by: Valentine Barshak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
arch/powerpc/boot/dts/sequoia.dts | 20
1 files changed, 20 insertions(+)
diff -pruN linux-2.6.orig/arch/
Fix two build errors on powerpc allyesconfig + CONFIG_SMP=n:
arch/powerpc/platforms/built-in.o: In function `cpu_affinity_set':
arch/powerpc/platforms/cell/spu_priv1_mmio.c:78: undefined reference to
`.iic_get_target_id'
arch/powerpc/platforms/built-in.o: In function `iic_init_IRQ':
arch/powerpc/
I've worked in parallel with Stefan Roese on the new OF NDFC support.
This version (as well as Stefan's) is based on the original NDFC driver by
Thomas Gleixner.
The major difference is that the original implements each chip connected NDFC
banks as a
separate MTD device. Here I try to have one MT
Hello.
Valentine Barshak wrote:
> NDFC (NAND Flash Controller) DTS entry for PowerPC 440EPx Sequoia board.
> The NDFC is relocatable in EBC space.
> Signed-off-by: Valentine Barshak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
You need to documents the layout in the
Documentation/powerpc/booting-without-of.txt fi
PowerPC 44x NAND Flash Controller (NDFC) bindings
Signed-off-by: Valentine Barshak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
Documentation/powerpc/booting-without-of.txt | 43 +++
1 files changed, 43 insertions(+)
--- linux-2.6.orig/Documentation/powerpc/booting-without-of.txt 2007-10-26
On Friday 26 October 2007, Olof Johansson wrote:
> Fix two build errors on powerpc allyesconfig + CONFIG_SMP=n:
>
> arch/powerpc/platforms/built-in.o: In function `cpu_affinity_set':
> arch/powerpc/platforms/cell/spu_priv1_mmio.c:78: undefined reference to
> `.iic_get_target_id' arch/powerpc/platfo
>From 61da8cf1f92043925ea20ffafafaf0874d761b0e Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Randy Vinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2007 17:36:59 -0700
Subject: [PATCH] Allow sharing of CMOS clock setup.
Move the CMOS RTC clock setup code from arch/powerpc/platforms/fsl_uli1575.c
to arch/powerpc/sysd
On Fri, 26 Oct 2007 20:30:58 +0400
Valentine Barshak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I've worked in parallel with Stefan Roese on the new OF NDFC support.
> This version (as well as Stefan's) is based on the original NDFC driver by
> Thomas Gleixner.
> The major difference is that the original imple
On Fri, Oct 26, 2007 at 10:04:19AM -0500, Kumar Gala wrote:
>
> On Oct 25, 2007, at 10:51 PM, Surya Ravikiran wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > I am trying to bootup a Linux kernel, on a FS eval board with 256M.
> > I pass the kernel argument mem=252M, and see that the kernel boots up
> > fine, but with m
> Johannes, and what is product ID for your touchpad?
It's 0x20e, listed as 'fountain'
johannes
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
___
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org
https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listi
Scott Wood wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 26, 2007 at 10:04:19AM -0500, Kumar Gala wrote:
>> The reason you have 192M is that lowmem is the total amount of memory
>> that can be covered by up to three CAM entries. In the case of
>> setting mem=252M that max that three CAM entries can cover is 192M (64
[Powerpc] fix switch_slb handling of 1T ESID values
Now that we have 1TB segment size support, we need to be using the
GET_ESID_1T macro when comparing ESID values for pc,stack, and
unmapped_base within switch_slb() when we're on a CPU that supports it.
This also happens to fix a duplicate-slb-e
On Fri, 26 Oct 2007, Scott Wood wrote:
> Scott Wood wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 26, 2007 at 10:04:19AM -0500, Kumar Gala wrote:
> > > The reason you have 192M is that lowmem is the total amount of memory
> > > that can be covered by up to three CAM entries. In the case of setting
> > > mem=252M that
On Fri, 26 Oct 2007, Valentine Barshak wrote:
> The major difference is that the original implements each chip connected NDFC
> banks as a
> separate MTD device. Here I try to have one MTD device spread on all chips
> found.
> However, the chips should have equal ID's and sizes, but I've never se
Kumar Gala wrote:
> On Fri, 26 Oct 2007, Scott Wood wrote:
>
>> Scott Wood wrote:
>>> On Fri, Oct 26, 2007 at 10:04:19AM -0500, Kumar Gala wrote:
The reason you have 192M is that lowmem is the total amount of memory
that can be covered by up to three CAM entries. In the case of setting
On Fri, 26 Oct 2007 20:39:58 +0400 Valentine Barshak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> +static int __devinit parse_partitions(struct of_ndfc *ndfc,
> + struct of_device *dev)
> +{
> + const char *partname;
> + static const char *part_probe_types[]
> +
On Fri, 2007-10-26 at 15:46 -0500, Will Schmidt wrote:
> [Powerpc] fix switch_slb handling of 1T ESID values
>
> Now that we have 1TB segment size support, we need to be using the
> GET_ESID_1T macro when comparing ESID values for pc,stack, and
> unmapped_base within switch_slb() when we're on a
Hi Valentine,
On Friday 26 October 2007, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Fri, 26 Oct 2007, Valentine Barshak wrote:
> > The major difference is that the original implements each chip connected
> > NDFC banks as a separate MTD device. Here I try to have one MTD device
> > spread on all chips found. How
Hi Valentine,
On Friday 26 October 2007, Valentine Barshak wrote:
> This adds device-tree aware PowerPC 44x NDFC (NAND Flash Controller)
> driver. The code is based on the original ndfc.c driver by Thomas Gleixner.
> The major difference is that here we try to handle all chips found as one
> mtd d
50 matches
Mail list logo
