Re: DTS file PCI / i8259 for Xilinx ML510

2009-03-15 Thread Roderick Colenbrander
> > At some point in the file they create some (dummy?) pcie section in > > which they define a uli1575, an isa bus and attached to that isa bus a > > i8259. Is this the correct way of doing things? The i8259 driver seems > > to use io ports 0x20-21/0xa0-0xa1/0x4d0-0x4d1 those are also defined > >

Re: DTS file PCI / i8259 for Xilinx ML510

2009-03-15 Thread Gerhard Pircher
Original-Nachricht > Datum: Sun, 15 Mar 2009 09:38:26 +0100 > Von: "Roderick Colenbrander" > An: "Gerhard Pircher" , linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org > Betreff: Re: DTS file PCI / i8259 for Xilinx ML510 > > > At some point in the file they create some (dummy?) pcie section in > > > whic

Re: DTS file PCI / i8259 for Xilinx ML510

2009-03-15 Thread Roderick Colenbrander
> > I got the i8259 south bridge working now after adding an io_base_virt > > offset to all inb/outb lines in sysdev/i8259.c. Would it be worth all > > the troubles to add ppc32 support to isa-bridge.c? The whole point of > > the code is basically to remap the io memory to low addresses for these >

[PATCH] powerpc: Remove extra semicolon in fsl_soc.c (2nd try)

2009-03-15 Thread Johns Daniel
TSEC/MDIO will not work with older device trees because of a semicolon at the end of a macro resulting in an empty for loop body. This fix only applies to 2.6.28; this code is gone in 2.6.29, according to Grant Likely! Signed-off-by: Johns Daniel >

Re: DTS file PCI / i8259 for Xilinx ML510

2009-03-15 Thread Gerhard Pircher
Original-Nachricht > Datum: Sun, 15 Mar 2009 12:00:17 +0100 > Von: "Roderick Colenbrander" > An: "Gerhard Pircher" , linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org > Betreff: Re: DTS file PCI / i8259 for Xilinx ML510 > > > I got the i8259 south bridge working now after adding an io_base_virt > > > of

Re: use generic pci_assign_unassign_resources

2009-03-15 Thread Benjamin Herrenschmidt
On Fri, 2009-03-13 at 16:42 -0600, Mark Takatz wrote: > Ben, > > We're looking at the fixes you put in place for the various PCI errors > and we think this is the solution we need for our system, a GE Fanuc CM6 > PPC board (single 8641), but your patches appear to apply either to > 2.6.24 or 2.

Re: [RFC] Moving toward smarter disabling of FPRs, VRs, and VSRs in the MSR

2009-03-15 Thread Benjamin Herrenschmidt
On Sat, 2009-03-14 at 09:58 -0500, Ryan Arnold wrote: > We can do some VMX testing on existing POWER6 machines. The VSX > instruction set hasn't been fully implemented in GCC yet so we'll need > to wait a bit for that. Does anyone have an idea for a good VMX/Altivec > benchmark? Note that there

[PATCH] cpumask: use mm_cpumask() wrapper: powerpc

2009-03-15 Thread Rusty Russell
Makes code futureproof against the impending change to mm->cpu_vm_mask. It's also a chance to use the new cpumask_ ops which take a pointer (the older ones are deprecated, but there's no hurry for arch code). Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell --- arch/powerpc/include/asm/mmu_context.h |2 +- arc

Re: DTS device tree node for dual port RAM

2009-03-15 Thread Grant Likely
On Thu, Mar 12, 2009 at 9:19 AM, EXTERNAL Lange Matthias (AA-DGW/ENG1) wrote: >> What hardware irq# are you using?  See this link for a description of >> what the interrupts property should look like for external IRQs: > > I am using hardware irq# 0 which is wired to the critical input line. That'

Re: Freescale MPC8313ERDB-RevA and newer BSP/kernel

2009-03-15 Thread Vijay Nikam
Hi Mark, Could you please let me know how you booted the latest Linux kernel on MPC8313ERDB board ? ? ? As I tried but was not successful. It hangs or does nothing and waits at network configuration, mean to determine IP address (as I have used dhcp). Kindly please acknowledge ... thank you ...

Re: [RFC] Moving toward smarter disabling of FPRs, VRs, and VSRs in the MSR

2009-03-15 Thread Michael Neuling
> > We can do some VMX testing on existing POWER6 machines. The VSX > > instruction set hasn't been fully implemented in GCC yet so we'll need > > to wait a bit for that. Does anyone have an idea for a good VMX/Altivec > > benchmark? > > Note that there are two aspects to the problem: > > - La