Paul Mackerras <pau...@samba.org> writes: > On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 11:22:08AM +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: >> On Mon, 2012-07-23 at 09:56 +1000, Paul Mackerras wrote: >> > > That indicate we should not mask the top 16 bits. So remove the >> > same. >> > >> > Older versions of the architecture (2.02 and earler) require the >> > masking, so we can't just unconditionally remove it, since that would >> > potentially break POWER5 and PPC970. People are definitely still >> > running Linux bare-metal on PPC970s (though arguably not on POWER5). >> >> Are you sure ? I couldn't convince myself ... the old architectures say >> that it only uses some of the bits but it doesn't mark the other ones as >> "reserved" (as in must be 0). >> >> (At least 1.x, I haven't looked at 2.x with x < 03) > > 2.01 and 2.02 say bits 0..15 must be zero.
is this 0..15 of va or 0..15 of AVA ? if it is 0.. 15 then that clear bit is wrong right ? We are doing that on a 64 bit va. So with that we already have ignored 0..14. -aneesh _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
