On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 05:10:31PM +1100, Russell Currey wrote:
>"p5ioc2 is used by approximately 2 machines in the world, and has never
>ever been a supported configuration."
>
>The code for p5ioc2 is essentially unused and complicates what is already
>a very complicated codebase. Its removal is
On 13/01/16 17:10, Russell Currey wrote:
"p5ioc2 is used by approximately 2 machines in the world, and has never
ever been a supported configuration."
The code for p5ioc2 is essentially unused and complicates what is already
a very complicated codebase. Its removal is essentially a "free win"
On Wed, 2016-01-13 at 17:39 +1100, Andrew Donnellan wrote:
> On 13/01/16 17:10, Russell Currey wrote:
> > "p5ioc2 is used by approximately 2 machines in the world, and has never
> > ever been a supported configuration."
> >
> > The code for p5ioc2 is essentially unused and complicates what is
"p5ioc2 is used by approximately 2 machines in the world, and has never
ever been a supported configuration."
The code for p5ioc2 is essentially unused and complicates what is already
a very complicated codebase. Its removal is essentially a "free win" in
the effort to simplify the powernv PCI
