FUJITA Tomonori wrote:
On Fri, 12 Mar 2010 20:12:39 +0100
Albert Herranz albert_herr...@yahoo.es wrote:
The current SWIOTLB code does not support NOT_COHERENT_CACHE platforms.
This patch adds support for NOT_COHERENT_CACHE platforms to SWIOTLB by
adding two platform specific functions
FUJITA Tomonori wrote:
If we want to make swiotlb generic (make on any architectures), we
need to handle more cache issues here, I think. So it's better to have
more generic ways instead of adding hooks to some archs.
Ok. So what would be an acceptable way of handling this in a generic way?
Hello, Kenji-san
Kenji Kaneshige wrote:
I misunderstood the problem.
My understanding was memory resource was not enabled even though Linux
set
the Memory Space bit in the command register. But it was not correct. The
bridge memory window was marked unused and Linux didn't try to set Memory
On Sat, 2010-03-13 at 00:29 +, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
[...]
after that xen could use
irq_to_desc_alloc_node_f(irq, node, xen_init_chip_data);
as need...
at last we don't need to call x86_init_chip_data everywhere.
This was one of the things I was considering. It seems like one
Ian Campbell ian.campb...@citrix.com writes:
On Sat, 2010-03-13 at 00:29 +, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
[...]
after that xen could use
irq_to_desc_alloc_node_f(irq, node, xen_init_chip_data);
as need...
at last we don't need to call x86_init_chip_data everywhere.
This was one of
On Tue, 16 Mar 2010 06:58:41 +0100
Albert Herranz albert_herr...@yahoo.es wrote:
FUJITA Tomonori wrote:
On Fri, 12 Mar 2010 20:12:40 +0100
Albert Herranz albert_herr...@yahoo.es wrote:
The current SWIOTLB code uses a default of 64MB for the IO TLB area.
This size can be influenced
On Mon, 15 Mar 2010, Randy Dunlap wrote:
I have fixed some typos.
Acked-by: Randy Dunlap rdun...@xenotime.net
Jiri, can you merge these, please, unless someone objects (?).
Yes, I will take it, thanks. A couple comments though:
- [important!] Thomas, it's not necessary to CC zillions of
OpenWRT has some fixes which adds the board descriptions for the OpenRB
(ppc504 based boards). Is there any reason why these should not be
merged into the mainline kernel? The fixes are all licences GPL2.
If not do you want the original authors to submit them, or shall I take the
OpenWRT
On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 12:23:19PM +, David Goodenough wrote:
OpenWRT has some fixes which adds the board descriptions for the OpenRB
(ppc504 based boards). Is there any reason why these should not be
ppc504? I've not heard of that one. Is that a typo for 405?
merged into the mainline
On Tue, 16 Mar 2010, Rupjyoti Sarmah wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Jiri Kosina [mailto:jkos...@suse.cz]
Sent: Tuesday, March 16, 2010 9:18 PM
To: Rupjyoti Sarmah
Cc: linux-ker...@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Failure with the 2.6.34-rc1 kernel
On Tue, 16 Mar 2010, Rupjyoti
On Mar 16, 2010, at 5:08 AM, FUJITA Tomonori wrote:
On Tue, 16 Mar 2010 06:58:41 +0100
Albert Herranz albert_herr...@yahoo.es wrote:
FUJITA Tomonori wrote:
On Fri, 12 Mar 2010 20:12:40 +0100
Albert Herranz albert_herr...@yahoo.es wrote:
The current SWIOTLB code uses a default of 64MB for
On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 02:22:13PM +1100, Paul Mackerras wrote:
On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 10:04:54PM +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 04:46:15PM +1100, Paul Mackerras wrote:
14.99%perf [kernel.kallsyms] [k] ._raw_spin_lock
|
On Fri, 2010-02-26 at 09:29 +0100, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
+#ifdef CONFIG_MODULES
+ /* Only modules will cause ITLB Misses as we always
+* pin the first 8MB of kernel memory */
andi. r11, r10, 0x0800/* Address = 0x8000 */
beq 3f
lis
On Fri, 2010-02-26 at 09:29 +0100, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
Only the swap function cares about the ACCESSED bit in
the pte. Do not waste cycles updateting ACCESSED when swap
is not compiled into the kernel.
---
Your changeset comment is a bit misleading since the code isn't actually
updating
Hello, Kenji-san
Kenji Kaneshige wrote:
I misunderstood the problem.
My understanding was memory resource was not enabled even though Linux
set
the Memory Space bit in the command register. But it was not correct. The
bridge memory window was marked unused and Linux didn't try to set Memory
On Tue, 16 Mar 2010 15:39:03 +0100, Josh Boyer jwbo...@linux.vnet.ibm.com
wrote:
On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 12:23:19PM +, David Goodenough wrote:
OpenWRT has some fixes which adds the board descriptions for the OpenRB
(ppc504 based boards). Is there any reason why these should not be
OpenWRT has some fixes which adds the board descriptions for the OpenRB
(ppc504 based boards). Is there any reason why these should not be
merged into the mainline kernel? The fixes are all licences GPL2.
If not do you want the original authors to submit them, or shall I take the
OpenWRT
powerpc initializes swiotlb before parsing the kernel boot options so
swiotlb options (e.g. specifying the swiotlb buffer size) are ignored.
Any time before freeing bootmem works for swiotlb so this patch moves
powerpc's swiotlb initialization after parsing the kernel boot
options, mem_init (as
On Tue, 16 Mar 2010 14:28:09 -0500
Becky Bruce bec...@kernel.crashing.org wrote:
On Mar 16, 2010, at 5:08 AM, FUJITA Tomonori wrote:
On Tue, 16 Mar 2010 06:58:41 +0100
Albert Herranz albert_herr...@yahoo.es wrote:
FUJITA Tomonori wrote:
On Fri, 12 Mar 2010 20:12:40 +0100
Albert
Felix Radensky wrote:
Hello, Kenji-san
Kenji Kaneshige wrote:
I misunderstood the problem.
My understanding was memory resource was not enabled even though Linux
set
the Memory Space bit in the command register. But it was not correct. The
bridge memory window was marked unused and Linux
We shouldn't be always setting 'M' in the TLB entry since its reasonable
for somethings to be mapped non-coherent. The PTE should have 'M' set
properly.
Signed-off-by: Kumar Gala ga...@kernel.crashing.org
---
arch/powerpc/kernel/head_fsl_booke.S |3 ---
1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 3
Hi,
Just a couple of quick points ...
On Tue, 16 Mar 2010 21:23:16 -0700 Rupjyoti Sarmah rsar...@amcc.com wrote:
This patch enables the on-chip DWC SATA controller of the AppliedMicro
processor 460EX.
Signed-off-by: Rupjyoti Sarmah rsar...@appliedmicro.com ,Mark Miesfeld
forgot to cc the list
-- Forwarded message --
Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2010 00:13:00 -0500 (CDT)
From: Kumar Gala ga...@kernel.crashing.org
To: Benjamin Herrenschmidt b...@kernel.crashing.org
Subject: [git pull] Please pull powerpc.git merge branch
The following changes since commit
Hi Stephen,
Thanks for your suggestions.
I used git-send-email earlier and emails never appeared in the archive.
This time I sent through outlook the message appeared in the archive.
Looks like outlook did that word wrap.
I am not sure why the emails from the git-send-email did not get
24 matches
Mail list logo
