On 09/05/2016 03:45 AM, David Gibson wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 09:23:40AM +0200, Cédric Le Goater wrote:
>> On 08/30/2016 08:15 AM, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
>>> On Mon, 2016-08-29 at 10:30 -0400, David Gibson wrote:
Possibly. In fact, I'm planning to eliminate cpu->cpu_dt_id
On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 09:23:40AM +0200, Cédric Le Goater wrote:
> On 08/30/2016 08:15 AM, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> > On Mon, 2016-08-29 at 10:30 -0400, David Gibson wrote:
> >>
> >> Possibly. In fact, I'm planning to eliminate cpu->cpu_dt_id at some
> >> point, in favour of having the mac
On Tue, 2016-08-30 at 02:28 -0400, David Gibson wrote:
> No.. the PIR itself is a cpu level construct (and we already have a
> place for that in the cpu state). The DT id as such isn't, although
> it happens to have the same value. The fact it has the same value is
> itself a machine type propert
On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 04:15:35PM +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> On Mon, 2016-08-29 at 10:30 -0400, David Gibson wrote:
> >
> > Possibly. In fact, I'm planning to eliminate cpu->cpu_dt_id at some
> > point, in favour of having the machine type construct the id when it
> > actually builds
On 08/30/2016 08:15 AM, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> On Mon, 2016-08-29 at 10:30 -0400, David Gibson wrote:
>>
>> Possibly. In fact, I'm planning to eliminate cpu->cpu_dt_id at some
>> point, in favour of having the machine type construct the id when it
>> actually builds the dt. It's not real
On Mon, 2016-08-29 at 10:30 -0400, David Gibson wrote:
>
> Possibly. In fact, I'm planning to eliminate cpu->cpu_dt_id at some
> point, in favour of having the machine type construct the id when it
> actually builds the dt. It's not really a cpu level construct.
On PowerNV it is as it's equal t
On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 07:49:20PM +0200, Cédric Le Goater wrote:
> On 08/16/2016 04:39 AM, David Gibson wrote:
> > On Fri, Aug 05, 2016 at 11:15:37AM +0200, Cédric Le Goater wrote:
> >> This is largy inspired by sPAPRCPUCore with some simplification, no
> >> hotplug for instance. But the differenc
On 08/16/2016 07:02 AM, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> On Tue, 2016-08-16 at 12:39 +1000, David Gibson wrote:
>> On Fri, Aug 05, 2016 at 11:15:37AM +0200, Cédric Le Goater wrote:
>>>
>>> This is largy inspired by sPAPRCPUCore with some simplification, no
>>> hotplug for instance. But the differenc
On 08/16/2016 04:39 AM, David Gibson wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 05, 2016 at 11:15:37AM +0200, Cédric Le Goater wrote:
>> This is largy inspired by sPAPRCPUCore with some simplification, no
>> hotplug for instance. But the differences are small and the objects
>> could possibly be merged.
>>
>> A set of P
On Tue, 2016-08-16 at 12:39 +1000, David Gibson wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 05, 2016 at 11:15:37AM +0200, Cédric Le Goater wrote:
> >
> > This is largy inspired by sPAPRCPUCore with some simplification, no
> > hotplug for instance. But the differences are small and the objects
> > could possibly be merge
On Fri, Aug 05, 2016 at 11:15:37AM +0200, Cédric Le Goater wrote:
> This is largy inspired by sPAPRCPUCore with some simplification, no
> hotplug for instance. But the differences are small and the objects
> could possibly be merged.
>
> A set of PowerNVCPUCore objects is added to the PnvChip and
11 matches
Mail list logo
