Scott Wood <scottw...@freescale.com> wrote on 14/10/2009 22:22:25: > > Joakim Tjernlund wrote: > > Scott Wood <scottw...@freescale.com> wrote on 14/10/2009 21:23:02: > >> Joakim Tjernlund wrote: > >>> BTW, you could add a test and printk in do_page_fault on address > >>> 0x000000f0. > >>> if that ever hits there is a problem with dcbX fixup. > >> It doesn't get any 0xf0 faults. > >> > >> FWIW, I'm not seeing the segfault any more, but I still get the lockup. > > > > Have you reverted > > 8xx: start using dcbX instructions in various copy routines ? > > > > After that you could stick a > > b DataAccess > > > > directly in the DTLB error handler to skip and dcbX fixups. > > With that, I don't see the hard lockup, but things get stuck during
You needed both to loose the hard lockup? I would think it should be enough to revert the "various copy routines" stuff? I figure that these routines aren't working in 8xx for other reasons since they haven't been used on 8xx since at least early 2.4. > bootup with everything idle. I see this even if I revert everything but > the "invalidate non present TLBs" patch, and I was seeing similar things > sometimes with the other tlbil_va hacks. OK, something else is up. > > I think there's something else going on in the 2.6 8xx code that needs > to be fixed before we can tell what the impact of these patches is. > I'll look into it. Great because I am really out of ideas. Perhaps back down to 2.6.30 and test from there? _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev