On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 08:40:24PM +0200, Thomas Bogendoerfer wrote:
> On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 02:59:26PM +0300, Serge Semin wrote:
> > I think there is a misunderstanding here. In this patch I am not enabling
>
> you are right, I've missed the fact, that this also needs to be enabled
> in TLB
On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 08:30:57PM +0200, Thomas Bogendoerfer wrote:
> On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 04:48:26PM +0300, Serge Semin wrote:
> > On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 03:38:27PM +0200, Thomas Bogendoerfer wrote:
> > > On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 03:12:01PM +0300, Serge Semin wrote:
> > > > Since you don't
On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 02:59:26PM +0300, Serge Semin wrote:
> I think there is a misunderstanding here. In this patch I am not enabling
you are right, I've missed the fact, that this also needs to be enabled
in TLB entries. Strange that MIPS added the enable bit while R10k simply
do uncached
On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 04:48:26PM +0300, Serge Semin wrote:
> On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 03:38:27PM +0200, Thomas Bogendoerfer wrote:
> > On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 03:12:01PM +0300, Serge Semin wrote:
> > > Since you don't like the way I initially fixed it, suppose there we don't
> > > have
> > >
On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 02:59:27PM +0300, Serge Semin wrote:
> On Tue, May 19, 2020 at 05:50:53PM +0200, Thomas Bogendoerfer wrote:
> > On Mon, May 18, 2020 at 11:57:52PM +0300, Serge Semin wrote:
> > > On Mon, May 18, 2020 at 06:32:06PM +0200, Thomas Bogendoerfer wrote:
> > > > On Mon, May 18,
On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 03:38:27PM +0200, Thomas Bogendoerfer wrote:
> On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 03:12:01PM +0300, Serge Semin wrote:
> > Since you don't like the way I initially fixed it, suppose there we don't
> > have
> > another way but to introduce something like CONFIG_MIPS_CPS_NS16550_WIDTH
On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 03:12:01PM +0300, Serge Semin wrote:
> Since you don't like the way I initially fixed it, suppose there we don't have
> another way but to introduce something like CONFIG_MIPS_CPS_NS16550_WIDTH
> parameter to select a proper accessors, like sw in our case, and sb by
>
On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 03:12:02PM +0300, Serge Semin wrote:
> On Tue, May 19, 2020 at 05:50:53PM +0200, Thomas Bogendoerfer wrote:
> > On Mon, May 18, 2020 at 11:57:52PM +0300, Serge Semin wrote:
> > > On Mon, May 18, 2020 at 06:32:06PM +0200, Thomas Bogendoerfer wrote:
> > > > On Mon, May 18,
On Tue, May 19, 2020 at 05:50:53PM +0200, Thomas Bogendoerfer wrote:
> On Mon, May 18, 2020 at 11:57:52PM +0300, Serge Semin wrote:
> > On Mon, May 18, 2020 at 06:32:06PM +0200, Thomas Bogendoerfer wrote:
> > > On Mon, May 18, 2020 at 04:48:20PM +0300, Serge Semin wrote:
> > > > On Fri, May 15,
On Tue, May 19, 2020 at 05:50:53PM +0200, Thomas Bogendoerfer wrote:
> On Mon, May 18, 2020 at 11:57:52PM +0300, Serge Semin wrote:
> > On Mon, May 18, 2020 at 06:32:06PM +0200, Thomas Bogendoerfer wrote:
> > > On Mon, May 18, 2020 at 04:48:20PM +0300, Serge Semin wrote:
> > > > On Fri, May 15,
On Mon, May 18, 2020 at 11:57:52PM +0300, Serge Semin wrote:
> On Mon, May 18, 2020 at 06:32:06PM +0200, Thomas Bogendoerfer wrote:
> > On Mon, May 18, 2020 at 04:48:20PM +0300, Serge Semin wrote:
> > > On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 11:06:47PM +0200, Thomas Bogendoerfer wrote:
> > > > On Fri, May 15,
On Mon, May 18, 2020 at 06:32:06PM +0200, Thomas Bogendoerfer wrote:
> On Mon, May 18, 2020 at 04:48:20PM +0300, Serge Semin wrote:
> > On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 11:06:47PM +0200, Thomas Bogendoerfer wrote:
> > > On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 10:48:27AM +0300, Serge Semin wrote:
> > > > Thomas,
> > > >
On Mon, May 18, 2020 at 04:48:20PM +0300, Serge Semin wrote:
> On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 11:06:47PM +0200, Thomas Bogendoerfer wrote:
> > On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 10:48:27AM +0300, Serge Semin wrote:
> > > Thomas,
> > > Could you take a look at my comment below so I could proceed with the
> > >
On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 11:06:47PM +0200, Thomas Bogendoerfer wrote:
> On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 10:48:27AM +0300, Serge Semin wrote:
> > Thomas,
> > Could you take a look at my comment below so I could proceed with the
> > patchset v3 development?
>
> I can't help, but using r4k clocksource with
On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 11:06:47PM +0200, Thomas Bogendoerfer wrote:
> On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 10:48:27AM +0300, Serge Semin wrote:
> > Thomas,
> > Could you take a look at my comment below so I could proceed with the
> > patchset v3 development?
>
> I can't help, but using r4k clocksource with
On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 10:48:27AM +0300, Serge Semin wrote:
> Thomas,
> Could you take a look at my comment below so I could proceed with the
> patchset v3 development?
I can't help, but using r4k clocksource with changing frequency is
probaly only usefull as a random generator. So IMHO the only
Thomas,
Could you take a look at my comment below so I could proceed with the
patchset v3 development?
-Sergey
On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 04:31:21PM +0300, Serge Semin wrote:
> On Fri, May 08, 2020 at 05:41:50PM +0200, Thomas Bogendoerfer wrote:
> > On Wed, May 06, 2020 at 08:42:36PM +0300,
On Fri, May 08, 2020 at 05:41:50PM +0200, Thomas Bogendoerfer wrote:
> On Wed, May 06, 2020 at 08:42:36PM +0300, sergey.se...@baikalelectronics.ru
> wrote:
> > From: Serge Semin
> >
> > Commit 07d69579e7fe ("MIPS: Don't register r4k sched clock when
> > CPUFREQ enabled") disabled the r4k-clock
On Wed, May 06, 2020 at 08:42:36PM +0300, sergey.se...@baikalelectronics.ru
wrote:
> From: Serge Semin
>
> Commit 07d69579e7fe ("MIPS: Don't register r4k sched clock when
> CPUFREQ enabled") disabled the r4k-clock usage for scheduler ticks
> counting due to the scheduler being non-tolerant for
From: Serge Semin
Commit 07d69579e7fe ("MIPS: Don't register r4k sched clock when
CPUFREQ enabled") disabled the r4k-clock usage for scheduler ticks
counting due to the scheduler being non-tolerant for unstable
clocks sources. For the same reason the clock should be used
in the system
20 matches
Mail list logo
