> > >> @@ -263,7 +263,9 @@ long compat_arch_ptrace(struct task_stru
> > >> ret = ptrace_put_reg(child, numReg, freg);
> > >> } else {
> > >> flush_fp_to_thread(child);
> > >> -((unsigned int *)child->thread.r
Arnd Bergmann writes:
> On Thursday 02 April 2009, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> > | arch/powerpc/platforms/built-in.o:(.toc1+0x4e8): undefined reference to
> > `pci_io_base'
> >
> > due to arch/powerpc/platforms/cell/io-workarounds.c. I guess this file
> > shouldn't be built when CONFIG_PCI=n?
>
Add an option, on by default, to build all code under arch/powerpc with
-Werror, which causes gcc to treat warnings as errors.
The intention is to make it harder for people to inadvertantly introduce
errors in the arch/powerpc code. It needs to be configurable so that
if a warning is introduced, p
The irq remapping layer seems to cause some confusion when people
see a different irq number in /proc/interrupts vs the one they
request in their driver or DTS.
So have the irq remapping layer print out a message when we map an
irq. The message is only printed the first time the irq is mapped,
and
On Sat, Apr 04, 2009 at 05:46:38PM +0530, Vijay Nikam wrote:
Hello Vijay.
> Because while searching some information regarding this I learned
> about High-Res Timers. In linux-2.6.20 x86 has this feature enabled
> rather you can enable it but not for powerpc arch, Right ? ? ? If yes
> then is the
On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 07:44:29PM +0300, Anton Vorontsov wrote:
> This patch introduces ARCH_HAS_NORMAL_FRAME_POINTERS Kconfig symbol.
> When defined, the top level Makefile won't add -fno-omit-frame-pointer
> cflag (the flag is useless in PowerPC kernels, and also makes gcc
> generate wrong code)
On Sun, Apr 5, 2009 at 9:59 AM, Kumar Gala wrote:
> No, I think we should just fix drivers. There aren't that many SoC drivers
> and once they are fixed this will resolve itself.
I agree. The only reason I passed NULL when I wrote the drivers was
because I was too lazy to figure out what the r
On Thu, 2 Apr 2009, Chris Friesen wrote:
> Hugh Dickins wrote:
>
> > This is a cosmetic matter, not worth more than a couple of lines of
> > code: I suggested masking off the high bits in the display, but when
> > KAMEZAWA-san suggested just showing 0, it was hard to argue against
> > his brutal s
On Apr 5, 2009, at 9:39 AM, Grant Likely wrote:
On Sun, Apr 5, 2009 at 2:52 AM, Anton Vorontsov
wrote:
On Sat, Apr 04, 2009 at 11:59:39PM -0600, Grant Likely wrote:
Becky & Kumar,
Considering these fixups, would it be advisable for the dma
functions
to climb up the dev->parent linkage wh
On Sun, Apr 5, 2009 at 2:52 AM, Anton Vorontsov
wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 04, 2009 at 11:59:39PM -0600, Grant Likely wrote:
>> Becky & Kumar,
>>
>> Considering these fixups, would it be advisable for the dma functions
>> to climb up the dev->parent linkage when dma_ops are NULL?
>
> pcm->dev->parent do
With 2.6.29-git12 on a powerpc box i observed the following
warning
=
2.6.29-git12 #1
inconsistent {IN-RECLAIM_FS-W} -> {RECLAIM_FS-ON-W} usage.
yum-updatesd-he/6947 [HC0[0]:SC0[0]:HE1:SE1] takes:
(&inode->inotify_mutex){+.+.?.}, at: []
.inotify_inode_queue_event+
Dear Yigal Goldberger,
In message <673522.16603...@web38902.mail.mud.yahoo.com> you wrote:
>
> I'm trying to upgrade my powerpc system from 2.6.14.7 to 2.6.24.2 .
> I'm confused regarding the need to use a Flattened Device Tree, and not sure
> whether and how I should use it .Does u-boot 1.1.2 s
Hi All,
I'm trying to upgrade my powerpc system from 2.6.14.7 to 2.6.24.2 .
I'm confused regarding the need to use a Flattened Device Tree, and not sure
whether and how I should use it .Does u-boot 1.1.2 support it ?
(I migrated from ARCH=ppc to ARCH=powerpc) .
Best Regards,
Yigal Goldberger.
On Sat, Apr 04, 2009 at 11:59:39PM -0600, Grant Likely wrote:
> Becky & Kumar,
>
> Considering these fixups, would it be advisable for the dma functions
> to climb up the dev->parent linkage when dma_ops are NULL?
pcm->dev->parent doesn't point to the proper device, so
this won't work.
> On Sat,
14 matches
Mail list logo
