> On the prom boot path, with the firmware supposed to
> be managing the MMU, there is a case where:
>
> 1. Linux changes some BAT registers.
> 2. Bits 0x0070 are/become set in the MSR.
> 3. Linux takes an MMU fault.
> 4. The firmware handles it.
>
> AFAIK, you can't expect the firmware to leav
On Sun, 2010-10-03 at 14:13 -0500, Ayman El-Khashab wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 25, 2010 at 08:11:04AM +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> > On Fri, 2010-09-24 at 08:08 -0500, Ayman El-Khashab wrote:
> > >
> > > I suppose another option is to to use the kernel profiling option I
> > > always see but
On Sat, Sep 25, 2010 at 08:11:04AM +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> On Fri, 2010-09-24 at 08:08 -0500, Ayman El-Khashab wrote:
> >
> > I suppose another option is to to use the kernel profiling option I
> > always see but have never used. Is that a viable option to figure out
> > what is h
* Dave Hansen [2010-10-03 11:11:01]:
> On Sun, 2010-10-03 at 13:07 -0500, Robin Holt wrote:
> > On Sun, Oct 03, 2010 at 11:25:00PM +0530, Balbir Singh wrote:
> > > * Nathan Fontenot [2010-10-01 13:35:54]:
> > >
> > > > Define a version of memory_block_size_bytes() for powerpc/pseries such
> >
On Sun, 2010-10-03 at 13:07 -0500, Robin Holt wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 03, 2010 at 11:25:00PM +0530, Balbir Singh wrote:
> > * Nathan Fontenot [2010-10-01 13:35:54]:
> >
> > > Define a version of memory_block_size_bytes() for powerpc/pseries such
> > > that
> > > a memory block spans an entire lmb.
On Sun, Oct 03, 2010 at 11:25:00PM +0530, Balbir Singh wrote:
> * Nathan Fontenot [2010-10-01 13:35:54]:
>
> > Define a version of memory_block_size_bytes() for powerpc/pseries such that
> > a memory block spans an entire lmb.
>
> I hope I am not missing anything obvious, but why not just call i
* Nathan Fontenot [2010-10-01 13:35:54]:
> Define a version of memory_block_size_bytes() for powerpc/pseries such that
> a memory block spans an entire lmb.
I hope I am not missing anything obvious, but why not just call it
lmb_size, why do we need memblock_size?
Is lmb_size == memblock_size af
On 09/29/2010 02:37 PM, Greg KH wrote:
>> > Thankfully things like rpm, hald, and other miscellaneous commands scan
>> > that information.
>>
>> Really? Why? Why would rpm care about this? hald is dead now so we
>> don't need to worry about that anymore,
>
> That's not what compatibl
