On Wed, Oct 15, 2008 at 4:57 AM, Paul Walmsley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Nathan,
could you try Lauri's patch posted here:
http://marc.info/?l=linux-omapm=122407150608770w=2
without the strongly-ordered memory patches?
This patch works for my DSP test case.
I receive 10-20 kernel messages
* Nathan Monson [EMAIL PROTECTED] [081016 07:52]:
On Wed, Oct 15, 2008 at 4:57 AM, Paul Walmsley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Nathan,
could you try Lauri's patch posted here:
http://marc.info/?l=linux-omapm=122407150608770w=2
without the strongly-ordered memory patches?
This patch
* Nathan Monson [EMAIL PROTECTED] [081016 15:08]:
On Thu, Oct 16, 2008 at 1:57 PM, Tony Lindgren [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Here's my patch to attempt to fix this issue, could you all give it a
try please? So far it has worked for me, I'd like to hear what Nathan's
dsp test case does!
On Thu, Oct 16, 2008 at 3:10 PM, Tony Lindgren [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
No.. And I also got some -33 errors here too :( So back to the drawing
board.
Could you post step by step instructions on how you can reproduce your
problem?
I'm running the DSP Bridge patches in my kernel. I got them
* Nathan Monson [EMAIL PROTECTED] [081016 15:15]:
On Thu, Oct 16, 2008 at 3:10 PM, Tony Lindgren [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
No.. And I also got some -33 errors here too :( So back to the drawing
board.
Could you post step by step instructions on how you can reproduce your
problem?
I'm
* Tony Lindgren [EMAIL PROTECTED] [081016 15:53]:
* Nathan Monson [EMAIL PROTECTED] [081016 15:15]:
On Thu, Oct 16, 2008 at 3:10 PM, Tony Lindgren [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
No.. And I also got some -33 errors here too :( So back to the drawing
board.
Could you post step by step
* Tony Lindgren [EMAIL PROTECTED] [081016 15:59]:
* Tony Lindgren [EMAIL PROTECTED] [081016 15:53]:
* Nathan Monson [EMAIL PROTECTED] [081016 15:15]:
On Thu, Oct 16, 2008 at 3:10 PM, Tony Lindgren [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
No.. And I also got some -33 errors here too :( So back to the
On Thu, Oct 16, 2008 at 4:02 PM, Tony Lindgren [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well with this one I eventually got one -33 error, but not a series of
them.
This is with Lauri's patch and this patch applied.
With this patch alone, or with this patch plus your earlier patch, I
still get a dead kernel
* Nathan Monson [EMAIL PROTECTED] [081016 16:20]:
On Thu, Oct 16, 2008 at 4:02 PM, Tony Lindgren [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well with this one I eventually got one -33 error, but not a series of
them.
This is with Lauri's patch and this patch applied.
With this patch alone, or with this
* Nathan Monson [EMAIL PROTECTED] [081008 13:22]:
On Wed, Oct 8, 2008 at 11:36 AM, Nathan Monson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Felipe Contreras [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
irq -33, desc: c0335cf8, depth: 0, count: 0, unhandled: 0
On the BeagleBoard list, Pratheesh Gangadhar said that mapping I/O
The need for this has been discussed on this list a few times in the past.
Not having it is a bug to me for OMAP3.
There shouldn't really be any performance side effects the way it is being
used.
I agree, I did not notice any performance impact - we are using this setting
for couple of
On Thu, Oct 9, 2008 at 5:43 AM, Tony Lindgren [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Nathan, good to hear that the SO mode helps. But since you seem to
have it easily reproducable..
Reproducing is as easy as applying the DSP Bridge kernel patches and
then running the 'ping.out' sample like this: while true;
As stated before, this patch is just a workaround for testing
purposes, not a fix. Who knows what performance side effects it
has...
The need for this has been discussed on this list a few times in the past. Not
having it is a bug to me for OMAP3.
There shouldn't really be any performance
13 matches
Mail list logo
