>>> Hollis Blanchard 02.10.09 17:48 >>>
>On Wed, 2009-09-30 at 07:35 +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> The one Rusty suggested the other day may help here. I don't like it
>> as a drop-in replacement for BUILD_BUG_ON() though (due to it
>> deferring the error generated to the linking stage), I'd rather
Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
On Fri, 2009-09-25 at 18:01 +0900, Tejun Heo wrote:
With this patch applied the machine boots OK :-)
Ah... so, the problem really is too high address. If you've got some
time, it might be interesting to find out how far high is safe.
Might give me
Hello,
Heiko Schocher wrote:
> making a powerpc target with PCI support, shows the
> following warning:
>
> MODPOST vmlinux.o
> WARNING: vmlinux.o(.text+0x10430): Section mismatch in reference from the
> function pcibios_allocate_bus_resources() to the function
> .init.text:reparent_resources
At Sun, 4 Oct 2009 11:35:21 +0200,
Jean Delvare wrote:
>
> Hi Takashi,
>
> On Thu, 01 Oct 2009 08:52:59 +0200, Takashi Iwai wrote:
> > At Wed, 30 Sep 2009 18:55:05 +0200,
> > Jean Delvare wrote:
> > >
> > > On Wed, 30 Sep 2009 17:15:49 +0200, Takashi Iwai wrote:
> > > > Yes, indeed I prefer NULL
Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote on 04/10/2009 22:28:38:
>
> > I have managed to update the TLB code to make proper use of dirty and
> > accessed states.
> > Advantages are:
> > - I/D TLB Miss never needs to write to the linux pte, saving a few cycles
>
> That's good, that leaves us with only 40x to
Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote on 04/10/2009 22:26:42:
> On Sun, 2009-10-04 at 10:35 +0200, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
> > Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote on 03/10/2009
> > 12:57:28:
> > >
> > > On Sat, 2009-10-03 at 11:24 +0200, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
> > > >
> > > > So yes, there is a missing _tlbil_
> I have managed to update the TLB code to make proper use of dirty and
> accessed states.
> Advantages are:
> - I/D TLB Miss never needs to write to the linux pte, saving a few cycles
That's good, that leaves us with only 40x to fix now. Also we can remove
atomic updates of PTEs for all non-ha
On Sun, 2009-10-04 at 10:35 +0200, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
> Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote on 03/10/2009
> 12:57:28:
> >
> > On Sat, 2009-10-03 at 11:24 +0200, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
> > >
> > > So yes, there is a missing _tlbil_va() missing for 8xx somewhere
> > > but there is something more too
Scott Wood wrote on 02/10/2009 23:49:49:
>
> On Thu, Oct 01, 2009 at 08:35:59AM +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> > >From what I can see, the TLB miss code will check _PAGE_PRESENT, and
> > when not set, it will -still- insert something into the TLB (unlike
> > all other CPU types that go str
Benjamin Herrenschmidt writes:
> Maybe a better fix is to force alignment in the kernel by requesting
> size + 64k - 4k and aligning it.
Sure you are right.
Andreas.
>From b9441a3d2148d439e2730def3222a7b70dccc432 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Andreas Schwab
Date: Sun, 4 Oct 2009 14:29:04 +02
Hi Takashi,
On Thu, 01 Oct 2009 08:52:59 +0200, Takashi Iwai wrote:
> At Wed, 30 Sep 2009 18:55:05 +0200,
> Jean Delvare wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, 30 Sep 2009 17:15:49 +0200, Takashi Iwai wrote:
> > > Yes, indeed I prefer NULL check because the user can know the error
> > > at the right place. I sh
Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote on 03/10/2009 12:57:28:
>
> On Sat, 2009-10-03 at 11:24 +0200, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
> >
> > So yes, there is a missing _tlbil_va() missing for 8xx somewhere
> > but there is something more too.
> > Maybe your new filter functions and my
> > powerpc, 8xx: DTLB Error
12 matches
Mail list logo
