> > On Sun, 15 Jul 2007 21:06:27 +0200
> > Juergen Beisert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Replace NSC/Cyrix specific chipset access macros by inlined functions.
> > > With the macros a line like this fails (and does nothing):
> > > setCx86(CX86_CCR2, getCx86(CX86_CCR2) | 0x88);
> > > With
On Sun, 15 Jul 2007 21:06:27 +0200
Juergen Beisert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Replace NSC/Cyrix specific chipset access macros by inlined functions.
With the macros a line like this fails (and does nothing):
setCx86(CX86_CCR2, getCx86(CX86_CCR2) | 0x88);
With inlined functions
> > I fixed it all up
>
> I have a sad little patch from Nick here which adds a new
> include/asm-x86_64/processor-cyrix.h. I guess this patch broke the x86_64
> build.
I fixed that up too, but in a different way (just included
asm-i386/processor-cyrix.h)
-Andi
-
To unsubscribe from this
On 19 Jul 2007 15:56:51 +0200
Andi Kleen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Juergen Beisert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Hi Andi,
> >
> > On Thursday 19 July 2007 11:25, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > > On Thursday 19 July 2007 10:52:48 Juergen Beisert wrote:
> > > > On Thursday 19 July 2007 10:22, Andi
On 19 Jul 2007 15:56:51 +0200
Andi Kleen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Juergen Beisert [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hi Andi,
On Thursday 19 July 2007 11:25, Andi Kleen wrote:
On Thursday 19 July 2007 10:52:48 Juergen Beisert wrote:
On Thursday 19 July 2007 10:22, Andi Kleen wrote:
I fixed it all up
I have a sad little patch from Nick here which adds a new
include/asm-x86_64/processor-cyrix.h. I guess this patch broke the x86_64
build.
I fixed that up too, but in a different way (just included
asm-i386/processor-cyrix.h)
-Andi
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send
Juergen Beisert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hi Andi,
>
> On Thursday 19 July 2007 11:25, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > On Thursday 19 July 2007 10:52:48 Juergen Beisert wrote:
> > > On Thursday 19 July 2007 10:22, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > > > > Wow, that's a really cool bug; nice work! Don't forget to
Hi Andi,
On Thursday 19 July 2007 11:25, Andi Kleen wrote:
> On Thursday 19 July 2007 10:52:48 Juergen Beisert wrote:
> > On Thursday 19 July 2007 10:22, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > > > Wow, that's a really cool bug; nice work! Don't forget to update
> > > > arch/i386/kernel/cpu/mtrr/state.c, though;
On Thursday 19 July 2007 10:52:48 Juergen Beisert wrote:
> On Thursday 19 July 2007 10:22, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > > Wow, that's a really cool bug; nice work! Don't forget to update
> > > arch/i386/kernel/cpu/mtrr/state.c, though; it uses setCx86() as well. It
> > > needs to include
On Thursday 19 July 2007 10:22, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > Wow, that's a really cool bug; nice work! Don't forget to update
> > arch/i386/kernel/cpu/mtrr/state.c, though; it uses setCx86() as well. It
> > needs to include processor-cyrix.h.
>
> It also needs some big fat comments
No problem. Where
On Thursday 19 July 2007 09:17, Andres Salomon wrote:
> On Thu, 19 Jul 2007 08:49:05 +0200
>
> Juergen Beisert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Thursday 19 July 2007 03:02, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > On Sun, 15 Jul 2007 21:06:27 +0200
> > >
> > > Juergen Beisert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > >
> Wow, that's a really cool bug; nice work! Don't forget to update
> arch/i386/kernel/cpu/mtrr/state.c, though; it uses setCx86() as well. It
> needs
> to include processor-cyrix.h.
It also needs some big fat comments
-Andi
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe
On Thu, 19 Jul 2007 08:49:05 +0200
Juergen Beisert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thursday 19 July 2007 03:02, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Sun, 15 Jul 2007 21:06:27 +0200
> >
> > Juergen Beisert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Replace NSC/Cyrix specific chipset access macros by inlined
On Thursday 19 July 2007 03:02, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Sun, 15 Jul 2007 21:06:27 +0200
>
> Juergen Beisert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Replace NSC/Cyrix specific chipset access macros by inlined functions.
> > With the macros a line like this fails (and does nothing):
> >
On Thursday 19 July 2007 03:02, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Sun, 15 Jul 2007 21:06:27 +0200
Juergen Beisert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Replace NSC/Cyrix specific chipset access macros by inlined functions.
With the macros a line like this fails (and does nothing):
setCx86(CX86_CCR2,
On Thu, 19 Jul 2007 08:49:05 +0200
Juergen Beisert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thursday 19 July 2007 03:02, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Sun, 15 Jul 2007 21:06:27 +0200
Juergen Beisert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Replace NSC/Cyrix specific chipset access macros by inlined functions.
With the
Wow, that's a really cool bug; nice work! Don't forget to update
arch/i386/kernel/cpu/mtrr/state.c, though; it uses setCx86() as well. It
needs
to include processor-cyrix.h.
It also needs some big fat comments
-Andi
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel
On Thursday 19 July 2007 09:17, Andres Salomon wrote:
On Thu, 19 Jul 2007 08:49:05 +0200
Juergen Beisert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thursday 19 July 2007 03:02, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Sun, 15 Jul 2007 21:06:27 +0200
Juergen Beisert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Replace NSC/Cyrix
On Thursday 19 July 2007 10:22, Andi Kleen wrote:
Wow, that's a really cool bug; nice work! Don't forget to update
arch/i386/kernel/cpu/mtrr/state.c, though; it uses setCx86() as well. It
needs to include processor-cyrix.h.
It also needs some big fat comments
No problem. Where to add?
On Thursday 19 July 2007 10:52:48 Juergen Beisert wrote:
On Thursday 19 July 2007 10:22, Andi Kleen wrote:
Wow, that's a really cool bug; nice work! Don't forget to update
arch/i386/kernel/cpu/mtrr/state.c, though; it uses setCx86() as well. It
needs to include processor-cyrix.h.
Hi Andi,
On Thursday 19 July 2007 11:25, Andi Kleen wrote:
On Thursday 19 July 2007 10:52:48 Juergen Beisert wrote:
On Thursday 19 July 2007 10:22, Andi Kleen wrote:
Wow, that's a really cool bug; nice work! Don't forget to update
arch/i386/kernel/cpu/mtrr/state.c, though; it uses
Juergen Beisert [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hi Andi,
On Thursday 19 July 2007 11:25, Andi Kleen wrote:
On Thursday 19 July 2007 10:52:48 Juergen Beisert wrote:
On Thursday 19 July 2007 10:22, Andi Kleen wrote:
Wow, that's a really cool bug; nice work! Don't forget to update
On Sun, 15 Jul 2007 21:06:27 +0200
Juergen Beisert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Replace NSC/Cyrix specific chipset access macros by inlined functions.
> With the macros a line like this fails (and does nothing):
> setCx86(CX86_CCR2, getCx86(CX86_CCR2) | 0x88);
> With inlined functions this
On Sun, 15 Jul 2007 21:06:27 +0200
Juergen Beisert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Replace NSC/Cyrix specific chipset access macros by inlined functions.
With the macros a line like this fails (and does nothing):
setCx86(CX86_CCR2, getCx86(CX86_CCR2) | 0x88);
With inlined functions this line
Hi.
Thanks. you are right. TSC is still unstable.
On Sun, 15 Jul 2007 21:06:27 +0200
Juergen Beisert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Sunday 15 July 2007 14:00, TAKADA Yoshihito wrote:
> > Hi. I reported to remove pit_latch_buggy(http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/2/10/8).
> > In the report, I
Hi,
On Sunday 15 July 2007 14:00, TAKADA Yoshihito wrote:
> Hi. I reported to remove pit_latch_buggy(http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/2/10/8).
> In the report, I stated that TSC was unstable.
> When I installed 2.6.21, GeodeGX's TSC is stable.
GeodeGX1's TSC is stable until you activate halt/suspend
Hi. I reported to remove pit_latch_buggy(http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/2/10/8).
In the report, I stated that TSC was unstable.
When I installed 2.6.21, GeodeGX's TSC is stable.
It was fixed by http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8027 and follow:
commit 6b3964cde70cfe6db79d35b42137431ef7d2f7e4
Hi. I reported to remove pit_latch_buggy(http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/2/10/8).
In the report, I stated that TSC was unstable.
When I installed 2.6.21, GeodeGX's TSC is stable.
It was fixed by http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8027 and follow:
commit 6b3964cde70cfe6db79d35b42137431ef7d2f7e4
Hi,
On Sunday 15 July 2007 14:00, TAKADA Yoshihito wrote:
Hi. I reported to remove pit_latch_buggy(http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/2/10/8).
In the report, I stated that TSC was unstable.
When I installed 2.6.21, GeodeGX's TSC is stable.
GeodeGX1's TSC is stable until you activate halt/suspend
Hi.
Thanks. you are right. TSC is still unstable.
On Sun, 15 Jul 2007 21:06:27 +0200
Juergen Beisert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
On Sunday 15 July 2007 14:00, TAKADA Yoshihito wrote:
Hi. I reported to remove pit_latch_buggy(http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/2/10/8).
In the report, I stated that
30 matches
Mail list logo