Scott Wood wrote on 02/10/2009 23:49:49:
>
> On Thu, Oct 01, 2009 at 08:35:59AM +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> > >From what I can see, the TLB miss code will check _PAGE_PRESENT, and
> > when not set, it will -still- insert something into the TLB (unlike
> > all other CPU types that go str
On Sat, 2009-10-03 at 10:05 +0200, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
> Cannot shake the feeling that it this snip of code that causes it
> lwz r11, 0(r10) /* Get the level 1 entry */
> rlwinm. r10, r11,0,0,19 /* Extract page descriptor page
> address */
> beq 2f
Due to missing segment assignments the .text section was put in the NOTES
segment (and marked as NOTE section), and the .got was put in the DYNAMIC
segment.
Signed-off-by: Andreas Schwab
---
arch/powerpc/kernel/vdso32/vdso32.lds.S |4 ++--
1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
di
Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote on 03/10/2009 10:31:18:
>
> On Sat, 2009-10-03 at 10:05 +0200, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
> > Cannot shake the feeling that it this snip of code that causes it
> > lwz r11, 0(r10) /* Get the level 1 entry */
> > rlwinm. r10, r11,0,0,19 /* Extract p
Hi Albrecht,
you wrote your own microcode? :)
approach looks ok to me in general, but this patch is line-wrapped.
On Thu, Oct 01, 2009 at 09:55:38PM +0200, Albrecht Dreß wrote:
> This patch adds a method for defining different microcodes than the
> pe-defined ones for the MPC52xx processor's Be
Hi,
> > >> 'volatile' just doesn't really do what you think it should do. The
> > >> PowerPC architecture is too complicated w.r.t. ordering of reads and
> > >> writes. In other words, you can't trust it.
It's not sufficient on PowerPC.
It might be necessary, depending on the compiler's mood f
On Sat, 2009-10-03 at 11:24 +0200, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
>
> So yes, there is a missing _tlbil_va() missing for 8xx somewhere
> but there is something more too.
> Maybe your new filter functions and my
> powerpc, 8xx: DTLB Error must check for more errors.
> will do the trick?
Well, if we can'
> Making the target of foo volatile properly rechecks the condition on
> each iteration.
>
> OTOH my PPC box runs fine, so I'm probably missing something obvious.
Probably because the IO accessors do -both- volatile casts and
add the barriers :-)
Ben.
On Sat, 2009-10-03 at 11:25 +0200, Andreas Schwab wrote:
> Due to missing segment assignments the .text section was put in the NOTES
> segment (and marked as NOTE section), and the .got was put in the DYNAMIC
> segment.
Ouch, good catch ! Thanks.
Cheers,
Ben.
> Signed-off-by: Andreas Schwab
> -
Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote on 03/10/2009 12:57:28:
> On Sat, 2009-10-03 at 11:24 +0200, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
> >
> > So yes, there is a missing _tlbil_va() missing for 8xx somewhere
> > but there is something more too.
> > Maybe your new filter functions and my
> > powerpc, 8xx: DTLB Erro
Hi Wolfram:
Am 03.10.09 11:44 schrieb(en) Wolfram Sang:
you wrote your own microcode? :)
I modified the bcom_gen_bd_rx_task for a LPB peripheral as to perform
Endianess swapping during the transfer (works meanwhile :-).
Modifying the standard kernel code for testing seemed to be the wron
Andreas Schwab writes:
> Anton Blanchard writes:
>
>> On 64bit applications the VDSO is the only thing in segment 0. Since the VDSO
>> is position independent we can remove the hint and let get_unmapped_area pick
>> an area.
>
> This breaks gdb. The section table in the VDSO image when mapped i
> doesn't give any support, so it's all trial and error and error and
> error... If you have any idea, pointers would be appreciated!
Sorry, I hardly know anything about the microcode. From what I know, it
shouldn't be much fun due to various bugs in the Bestcomm engine.
> I don't think so -
Andreas Schwab writes:
> Andreas Schwab writes:
>
>> Anton Blanchard writes:
>>
>>> On 64bit applications the VDSO is the only thing in segment 0. Since the
>>> VDSO
>>> is position independent we can remove the hint and let get_unmapped_area
>>> pick
>>> an area.
>>
>> This breaks gdb. The
Am 03.10.09 16:40 schrieb(en) Wolfram Sang:
Sorry, I hardly know anything about the microcode. From what I know,
it shouldn't be much fun due to various bugs in the Bestcomm engine.
Ummm. That's not encouraging! :-/
Hey! No need for insults! ;)
Sorry, that wasn't my intention, but it's a
On Sat, 2009-10-03 at 16:51 +0200, Andreas Schwab wrote:
> Andreas Schwab writes:
>
> > Andreas Schwab writes:
> >
> >> Anton Blanchard writes:
> >>
> >>> On 64bit applications the VDSO is the only thing in segment 0. Since the
> >>> VDSO
> >>> is position independent we can remove the hint an
16 matches
Mail list logo
