Alexander Graf wrote:
When running on an exynos 5250 SoC, we don't initialize the architected
timers. The chip however supports architected timers.
Yes, exynos5250 can support, mct(multi core timer) is used though.
When we don't initialize them, KVM will try to access them and run into
On 04/02/2013 12:44 PM, Kukjin Kim wrote:
Alexander Graf wrote:
When running on an exynos 5250 SoC, we don't initialize the architected
timers. The chip however supports architected timers.
Yes, exynos5250 can support, mct(multi core timer) is used though.
When we don't initialize them, KVM
Alexander Graf wrote:
On 04/02/2013 12:44 PM, Kukjin Kim wrote:
Alexander Graf wrote:
When running on an exynos 5250 SoC, we don't initialize the architected
timers. The chip however supports architected timers.
Yes, exynos5250 can support, mct(multi core timer) is used though.
On 14.03.2013, at 20:07, Sergei Shtylyov wrote:
Hello.
On 14-03-2013 4:59, Alexander Graf wrote:
When running on an exynos 5250 SoC, we don't initialize the architected
timers. The chip however supports architected timers.
When we don't initialize them, KVM will try to access them and
Hello.
On 14-03-2013 4:59, Alexander Graf wrote:
When running on an exynos 5250 SoC, we don't initialize the architected
timers. The chip however supports architected timers.
When we don't initialize them, KVM will try to access them and run into
NULL pointer dereferences attempting to do
When running on an exynos 5250 SoC, we don't initialize the architected
timers. The chip however supports architected timers.
When we don't initialize them, KVM will try to access them and run into
NULL pointer dereferences attempting to do so.
This patch is really more of a hack than a real
On Wed, Mar 13, 2013 at 5:59 PM, Alexander Graf ag...@suse.de wrote:
When running on an exynos 5250 SoC, we don't initialize the architected
timers. The chip however supports architected timers.
When we don't initialize them, KVM will try to access them and run into
NULL pointer dereferences
