Re: [PATCH] [V2] Add non-Virtex5 support for LL TEMAC driver

2010-03-15 Thread Michal Simek
John Linn wrote: This patch adds support for using the LL TEMAC Ethernet driver on non-Virtex 5 platforms by adding support for accessing the Soft DMA registers as if they were memory mapped instead of solely through the DCR's (available on the Virtex 5). The patch also updates the driver so tha

Re: Problem with PCI bus rescan on 460EX

2010-03-15 Thread Kenji Kaneshige
Felix Radensky wrote: Hello Kenji-san, Kenji Kaneshige wrote: Felix Radensky wrote: Hello Kenji-san, Kenji Kaneshige wrote: I'm not sure, but I guess pci_setup_bridge() didn't update IO base/limit and Mem base/limit of the bridge (:00:02.0) because of the following lines. static void

Re: Problem with PCI bus rescan on 460EX

2010-03-15 Thread Felix Radensky
Hello, Kenji-san I think the device is expected to be ready to work if pci_enable_device() returns without error. So I think pci_enable_device() should return an error if it fails to enable the device (device is not ready to work). In this case, detecting your bridge's failure seems PPC specific

RE: [PATCH] [V2] Add non-Virtex5 support for LL TEMAC driver

2010-03-15 Thread John Linn
> -Original Message- > From: Michal Simek [mailto:michal.si...@petalogix.com] > Sent: Monday, March 15, 2010 2:40 AM > To: John Linn > Cc: net...@vger.kernel.org; linuxppc-...@ozlabs.org; grant.lik...@secretlab.ca; > jwbo...@linux.vnet.ibm.com; john.willi...@petalogix.com; John Tyner > Subj

Re: [PATCH] [V2] Add non-Virtex5 support for LL TEMAC driver

2010-03-15 Thread Michal Simek
John Linn wrote: -Original Message- From: Michal Simek [mailto:michal.si...@petalogix.com] Sent: Monday, March 15, 2010 2:40 AM To: John Linn Cc: net...@vger.kernel.org; linuxppc-...@ozlabs.org; grant.lik...@secretlab.ca; jwbo...@linux.vnet.ibm.com; john.willi...@petalogix.com; John Tyn

RE: [PATCH] [V2] Add non-Virtex5 support for LL TEMAC driver

2010-03-15 Thread John Linn
> -Original Message- > From: Michal Simek [mailto:michal.si...@petalogix.com] > Sent: Monday, March 15, 2010 8:40 AM > To: John Linn > Cc: net...@vger.kernel.org; linuxppc-...@ozlabs.org; grant.lik...@secretlab.ca; > jwbo...@linux.vnet.ibm.com; john.willi...@petalogix.com; John Tyner > Subj

Re: [PATCH] [V2] Add non-Virtex5 support for LL TEMAC driver

2010-03-15 Thread Michal Simek
John Linn wrote: -Original Message- From: Michal Simek [mailto:michal.si...@petalogix.com] Sent: Monday, March 15, 2010 8:40 AM To: John Linn Cc: net...@vger.kernel.org; linuxppc-...@ozlabs.org; grant.lik...@secretlab.ca; jwbo...@linux.vnet.ibm.com; john.willi...@petalogix.com; John Tyn

RE: [PATCH] [V2] Add non-Virtex5 support for LL TEMAC driver

2010-03-15 Thread Stephen Neuendorffer
> -Original Message- > From: linuxppc-dev-bounces+stephen=neuendorffer.n...@lists.ozlabs.org [mailto:linuxppc-dev- > bounces+stephen=neuendorffer.n...@lists.ozlabs.org] On Behalf Of John Linn > Sent: Friday, March 12, 2010 5:06 PM > To: net...@vger.kernel.org; linuxppc-...@ozlabs.org; gra

RE: [PATCH] [V2] Add non-Virtex5 support for LL TEMAC driver

2010-03-15 Thread John Linn
> -Original Message- > From: Stephen Neuendorffer > Sent: Monday, March 15, 2010 11:03 AM > To: John Linn; net...@vger.kernel.org; linuxppc-...@ozlabs.org; grant.lik...@secretlab.ca; > jwbo...@linux.vnet.ibm.com > Cc: michal.si...@petalogix.com; John Tyner; john.willi...@petalogix.com > Su

Re: [PATCH] powerpc/perf_events: Implement perf_arch_fetch_caller_regs for powerpc

2010-03-15 Thread Michael Neuling
> This implements a powerpc version of perf_arch_fetch_caller_regs. > It's implemented in assembly because that way we can be sure there > isn't a stack frame for perf_arch_fetch_caller_regs. If it was in > C, gcc might or might not create a stack frame for it, which would > affect the number of l

Re: [PATCH] powerpc/perf_events: Implement perf_arch_fetch_caller_regs for powerpc

2010-03-15 Thread Frederic Weisbecker
On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 04:46:15PM +1100, Paul Mackerras wrote: > This implements a powerpc version of perf_arch_fetch_caller_regs. > It's implemented in assembly because that way we can be sure there > isn't a stack frame for perf_arch_fetch_caller_regs. If it was in > C, gcc might or might not c

[PATCH 0/4] Some typo fixing

2010-03-15 Thread Thomas Weber
I have fixed some typos. Thomas Weber (4): Fix typo: [Ss]ytem => [Ss]ystem Fix typo: udpate => update Fix typo: paramters => parameters Fix typo: orginal => original Documentation/cgroups/cgroups.txt |2 +- Documentation/kbuild/kconfig.txt|2 +- Docu

Re: [PATCH 0/4] Some typo fixing

2010-03-15 Thread Randy Dunlap
On 03/15/10 13:55, Thomas Weber wrote: > I have fixed some typos. Acked-by: Randy Dunlap Jiri, can you merge these, please, unless someone objects (?). > Thomas Weber (4): > Fix typo: [Ss]ytem => [Ss]ystem > Fix typo: udpate => update > Fix typo: paramters => parameters > Fix typo: org

[PATCH] sysdev: the cpu probe/release attributes should be sysdev_class_attributes

2010-03-15 Thread Stephen Rothwell
This fixes these warnings: drivers/base/cpu.c:264: warning: initialization from incompatible pointer type drivers/base/cpu.c:265: warning: initialization from incompatible pointer type Cc: Andi Kleen Signed-off-by: Stephen Rothwell --- drivers/base/cpu.c | 16 1 files change

Re: [PATCH] sysdev: the cpu probe/release attributes should be sysdev_class_attributes

2010-03-15 Thread Greg KH
On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 10:33:32AM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > This fixes these warnings: > > drivers/base/cpu.c:264: warning: initialization from incompatible pointer type > drivers/base/cpu.c:265: warning: initialization from incompatible pointer type > > Cc: Andi Kleen > Signed-off-by: S

Re: [PATCH v4 05/11] swiotlb: add swiotlb_set_default_size()

2010-03-15 Thread FUJITA Tomonori
On Fri, 12 Mar 2010 20:12:40 +0100 Albert Herranz wrote: > The current SWIOTLB code uses a default of 64MB for the IO TLB area. > This size can be influenced using a kernel command line parameter "swiotlb". > Unfortunately, the parsing of the kernel command line is done _after_ the > swiotlb is i

Re: [PATCH v4 04/11] swiotlb: support NOT_COHERENT_CACHE PowerPC platforms

2010-03-15 Thread FUJITA Tomonori
On Fri, 12 Mar 2010 20:12:39 +0100 Albert Herranz wrote: > The current SWIOTLB code does not support NOT_COHERENT_CACHE platforms. > This patch adds support for NOT_COHERENT_CACHE platforms to SWIOTLB by > adding two platform specific functions swiotlb_dma_sync_page() and > swiotlb_dma_sync() whi

Re: [PATCH v4 04/11] swiotlb: support NOT_COHERENT_CACHE PowerPC platforms

2010-03-15 Thread FUJITA Tomonori
On Tue, 16 Mar 2010 10:54:40 +0900 FUJITA Tomonori wrote: > On Fri, 12 Mar 2010 20:12:39 +0100 > Albert Herranz wrote: > > > The current SWIOTLB code does not support NOT_COHERENT_CACHE platforms. > > This patch adds support for NOT_COHERENT_CACHE platforms to SWIOTLB by > > adding two platform

Re: [PATCH] powerpc/perf_events: Implement perf_arch_fetch_caller_regs for powerpc

2010-03-15 Thread Paul Mackerras
On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 10:04:54PM +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote: > On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 04:46:15PM +1100, Paul Mackerras wrote: > > 14.99%perf [kernel.kallsyms] [k] ._raw_spin_lock > > | > > --- ._raw_spin_lock > >

Linux Priority Levels

2010-03-15 Thread Ajay Jain
Hi, I need a deeper understanding of priorities of linux processes and threads, especially on Linux PPC. I have done some good reading, but found no material to be complete and therefore I am raising a few questions below. 1) In Linux processes have a static priority level 0, with nice values -20

Re: Linux Priority Levels

2010-03-15 Thread Michael Neuling
> I need a deeper understanding of priorities of linux processes and > threads, especially on Linux PPC. I have done some good reading, but > found no material to be complete and therefore I am raising a few > questions below. > > 1) In Linux processes have a static priority level 0, with nice val

Re: Problem with PCI bus rescan on 460EX

2010-03-15 Thread Kenji Kaneshige
Felix Radensky wrote: Hello, Kenji-san I think the device is expected to be ready to work if pci_enable_device() returns without error. So I think pci_enable_device() should return an error if it fails to enable the device (device is not ready to work). In this case, detecting your bridge's fai

Re: [PATCH v4 05/11] swiotlb: add swiotlb_set_default_size()

2010-03-15 Thread Albert Herranz
FUJITA Tomonori wrote: > On Fri, 12 Mar 2010 20:12:40 +0100 > Albert Herranz wrote: > >> The current SWIOTLB code uses a default of 64MB for the IO TLB area. >> This size can be influenced using a kernel command line parameter "swiotlb". >> Unfortunately, the parsing of the kernel command line is

Re: [PATCH v4 04/11] swiotlb: support NOT_COHERENT_CACHE PowerPC platforms

2010-03-15 Thread Albert Herranz
FUJITA Tomonori wrote: > On Fri, 12 Mar 2010 20:12:39 +0100 > Albert Herranz wrote: > >> The current SWIOTLB code does not support NOT_COHERENT_CACHE platforms. >> This patch adds support for NOT_COHERENT_CACHE platforms to SWIOTLB by >> adding two platform specific functions swiotlb_dma_sync_pag

Re: [PATCH v4 04/11] swiotlb: support NOT_COHERENT_CACHE PowerPC platforms

2010-03-15 Thread Albert Herranz
FUJITA Tomonori wrote: > If we want to make swiotlb generic (make on any architectures), we > need to handle more cache issues here, I think. So it's better to have > more generic ways instead of adding hooks to some archs. > Ok. So what would be an acceptable way of handling this in a generic wa