On 10 November 2018 at 8:20PM, Olof Johansson wrote:
>
>
> On Sat, Nov 10, 2018 at 00:55 Christian Zigotzky
wrote:
>
> Hi All,
>
> I read the following:
>
> The part that is debatably the heart of the chip is a PowerPC
core called the PA6T, a full blown 64-bit PPC with an FPU, VMX
On Thu, 2018-11-08 at 23:06 +, alex_gagn...@dellteam.com wrote:
> On 11/08/2018 04:51 PM, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 08, 2018 at 10:49:08PM +, alex_gagn...@dellteam.com wrote:
> > > In the case that we're trying to fix, this code executing is a result of
> > > the device being gone, so
On Fri, 2018-11-09 at 08:11 +0100, Lukas Wunner wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 08, 2018 at 02:09:17PM -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> > + /*
> > +* If an MMIO read from the device returns ~0 data, that data may
> > +* be valid, or it may indicate a bus error. If config space is
> > +* readable,
When building for ppc32 with clang these flags are unsupported:
-ffixed-r2 and -mmultiple
llvm's lib/Target/PowerPC/PPCRegisterInfo.cpp marks r2 as reserved on
when building for SVR4ABI and !ppc64:
// The SVR4 ABI reserves r2 and r13
if (Subtarget.isSVR4ABI()) {
// We only reserve r2
On 12/11/2018 15:23, David Gibson wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 12, 2018 at 01:36:45PM +1100, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 12/11/2018 12:08, David Gibson wrote:
>>> On Fri, Oct 19, 2018 at 11:53:53AM +1100, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
On 19/10/2018 05:05, Alex Williamson wrote:
On Mon, Nov 12, 2018 at 01:36:45PM +1100, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
>
>
> On 12/11/2018 12:08, David Gibson wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 19, 2018 at 11:53:53AM +1100, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> On 19/10/2018 05:05, Alex Williamson wrote:
> >>> On Thu, 18 Oct 2018 10:37:46 -0700
> >>>
On Mon, 12 Nov 2018 at 13:59, Masahiro Yamada
wrote:
>
> On Mon, Nov 12, 2018 at 10:05 AM Michael Ellerman wrote:
> >
> > Masahiro Yamada writes:
> > > On Sat, Nov 10, 2018 at 3:35 AM Greg Hackmann
> > > wrote:
> > >>
> > >> On 11/09/2018 10:29 AM, Nick Desaulniers wrote:
> > >> > On Mon, Nov
* Adam Borowski wrote:
> From: Nick Terrell
>
> Integrates the ZSTD decompression code to the x86 pre-boot code.
>
> Zstandard requires slightly more memory during the kernel decompression
> on x86 (192 KB vs 64 KB), and the memory usage is independent of the
> window size.
>
> Zstandard
Clang needs to be told which target it is building for when cross
compiling.
Link: https://github.com/ClangBuiltLinux/linux/issues/259
Signed-off-by: Joel Stanley
---
arch/powerpc/boot/Makefile | 5 +
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
diff --git a/arch/powerpc/boot/Makefile
The powerpc makefile will use these in it's boot wrapper.
Signed-off-by: Joel Stanley
---
Makefile | 1 +
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
diff --git a/Makefile b/Makefile
index 09278330282d..840efe6eb54c 100644
--- a/Makefile
+++ b/Makefile
@@ -495,6 +495,7 @@ endif
ifneq ($(GCC_TOOLCHAIN),)
v2: rebase on "kbuild: consolidate Clang compiler flags"
These patches allow clang to cross-compile the powerpc boot wrapper.
The boot wrapper constructs it's own compiler flags as it may not be
built for the same arch as the kernel.
The powerpc64le kernel builds natively with clang and with
On 11/12/2018 09:40 AM, Anshuman Khandual wrote:
>
>
> On 11/12/2018 09:27 AM, Joseph Qi wrote:
>> For ocfs2 part, node means host in the cluster, not NUMA node.
>>
>
> Does not -1 indicate an invalid node which can never be present ?
>
My bad, got it wrong. Seems like this is nothing to
On 11/12/2018 09:27 AM, Joseph Qi wrote:
> For ocfs2 part, node means host in the cluster, not NUMA node.
>
Does not -1 indicate an invalid node which can never be present ?
For ocfs2 part, node means host in the cluster, not NUMA node.
Thanks,
Joseph
On 18/11/12 10:41, Anshuman Khandual wrote:
> At present there are multiple places where invalid node number is encoded
> as -1. Even though implicitly understood it is always better to have macros
> in there. Replace
On Mon, Nov 12, 2018 at 10:05 AM Michael Ellerman wrote:
>
> Masahiro Yamada writes:
> > On Sat, Nov 10, 2018 at 3:35 AM Greg Hackmann wrote:
> >>
> >> On 11/09/2018 10:29 AM, Nick Desaulniers wrote:
> >> > On Mon, Nov 5, 2018 at 7:05 PM Masahiro Yamada
> >> > wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> Collect
* Masahiro Yamada wrote:
> GCC 4.6 manual says:
>
> -funit-at-a-time
> This option is left for compatibility reasons. -funit-at-a-time has
> no effect, while -fno-unit-at-a-time implies -fno-toplevel-reorder
> and -fno-section-anchors.
> Enabled by default.
>
> Signed-off-by:
At present there are multiple places where invalid node number is encoded
as -1. Even though implicitly understood it is always better to have macros
in there. Replace these open encodings for an invalid node number with the
global macro NUMA_NO_NODE. This helps remove NUMA related assumptions
The selftest I recently added to test branching to an out-of-bounds
NIP doesn't work on 64-bit big endian. It does fail but not in the
right way. That is it SEGVs trying to load from the opd at BAD_NIP,
but it never gets as far as branching to BAD_NIP.
To fix it we need to create an opd which is
Commit cafa0010cd51 ("Raise the minimum required gcc version to 4.6")
bumped the minimum GCC version to 4.6 for all architectures.
'$(call cc-option,-fno-unit-at-a-time)' is now dead code since
'$(cc-version) -lt 0400' is always false.
Signed-off-by: Masahiro Yamada
---
arch/x86/Makefile.um |
GCC 4.6 manual says:
-funit-at-a-time
This option is left for compatibility reasons. -funit-at-a-time has
no effect, while -fno-unit-at-a-time implies -fno-toplevel-reorder
and -fno-section-anchors.
Enabled by default.
Signed-off-by: Masahiro Yamada
---
arch/powerpc/Makefile | 4
1/2: remove dead code, which is logically obvious
because the minimum GCC version is now 4.6
2/2: we can say -funit-at-a-time is no longer useful
according to GCC 4.6 manual
I hope, this series can be applied through x86 tree.
Masahiro Yamada (2):
um: remove -fno-unit-at-a-time
On 12/11/2018 12:08, David Gibson wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 19, 2018 at 11:53:53AM +1100, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 19/10/2018 05:05, Alex Williamson wrote:
>>> On Thu, 18 Oct 2018 10:37:46 -0700
>>> Piotr Jaroszynski wrote:
>>>
On 10/18/18 9:55 AM, Alex Williamson wrote:
>
3.16.61-rc1 review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
--
From: Michael Jeanson
commit 69a8405999aa1c489de4b8d349468f0c2b83f093 upstream.
In binutils 2.26 a new opcode for the "wait" instruction was added for the
POWER9 and has precedence over the one
On Fri, Oct 19, 2018 at 11:53:53AM +1100, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
>
>
> On 19/10/2018 05:05, Alex Williamson wrote:
> > On Thu, 18 Oct 2018 10:37:46 -0700
> > Piotr Jaroszynski wrote:
> >
> >> On 10/18/18 9:55 AM, Alex Williamson wrote:
> >>> On Thu, 18 Oct 2018 11:31:33 +1100
> >>> Alexey
Masahiro Yamada writes:
> On Sat, Nov 10, 2018 at 3:35 AM Greg Hackmann wrote:
>>
>> On 11/09/2018 10:29 AM, Nick Desaulniers wrote:
>> > On Mon, Nov 5, 2018 at 7:05 PM Masahiro Yamada
>> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Collect basic Clang options such as --target, --prefix, --gcc-toolchain,
>> >>
Now that call_rcu()'s callback is not invoked until after all
preempt-disable regions of code have completed (in addition to explicitly
marked RCU read-side critical sections), call_rcu() can be used in place
of call_rcu_sched(). This commit therefore makes that change.
Signed-off-by: Paul E.
On Sat, Nov 10, 2018 at 3:35 AM Greg Hackmann wrote:
>
> On 11/09/2018 10:29 AM, Nick Desaulniers wrote:
> > On Mon, Nov 5, 2018 at 7:05 PM Masahiro Yamada
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> Collect basic Clang options such as --target, --prefix, --gcc-toolchain,
> >> -no-integrated-as into a single variable
Arch code should use tracehook_*() helpers, as documented
in include/linux/tracehook.h.
Signed-off-by: Elvira Khabirova
---
arch/powerpc/kernel/ptrace.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kernel/ptrace.c b/arch/powerpc/kernel/ptrace.c
index
28 matches
Mail list logo
