On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 10:42:04AM -0700, Nicolin Chen wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 04:12:53PM +0800, Shengjiu Wang wrote:
> > > Then we can get a patch like:
> > > open() {
> > > + clk_prepare_enable();
> > >
> > > }
> > >
> > > close() {
> > >
> > > + clk_disable_unprepare()
>
On 05/23/2014 08:45 PM, Anshuman Khandual wrote:
> This patch series adds five new ELF core note sections which can be
> used with existing ptrace request PTRACE_GETREGSET/SETREGSET for accessing
> various transactional memory and miscellaneous register sets on PowerPC
> platform. Please find
Move the ipg clock enable and disable operation to startup and shutdown,
that is only enable ipg clock when ssi is working. Keep clock is disabled
when ssi is in idle.
otherwise, _fsl_ssi_set_dai_fmt function need to be called in probe,
so add ipg clock control for it.
Signed-off-by: Shengjiu Wang
Hi Linus,
Hopefully you saw the message from Ben adding me as a co-maintainer for powerpc:
https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=ea668936b708029a0a11422ff834b651ac434c2d
Ben's travelling so this is my first attempt at a pull request.
There's nothing too
When doing vfio passthrough a VF, the kernel will crash with following
message:
[ 442.656459] Unable to handle kernel paging request for data at address
0x0060
[ 442.656593] Faulting instruction address: 0xc0038b88
[ 442.656706] Oops: Kernel access of bad area, sig: 11 [#1]
[ 442.
Backported from 78e05b1421fa upstream, for stable 3.14 and 3.16.
Similar to the previous commit which described why we need to add a
barrier to arch_spin_is_locked(), we have a similar problem with
spin_unlock_wait().
We need a barrier on entry to ensure any spinlock we have previously
taken is v
Backported from 51d7d5205d33 upstream, for stable 3.14 and 3.16.
The kernel defines the function spin_is_locked(), which can be used to
check if a spinlock is currently locked.
Using spin_is_locked() on a lock you don't hold is obviously racy. That
is, even though you may observe that the lock is
On 2014/9/10 22:59, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 01:38:25PM +0100, David Vrabel wrote:
>> On 09/09/14 03:06, Yijing Wang wrote:
>>> On 2014/9/5 22:29, David Vrabel wrote:
On 05/09/14 11:09, Yijing Wang wrote:
> Use MSI chip framework instead of arch MSI functions
On 2014/9/10 20:38, David Vrabel wrote:
> On 09/09/14 03:06, Yijing Wang wrote:
>> On 2014/9/5 22:29, David Vrabel wrote:
>>> On 05/09/14 11:09, Yijing Wang wrote:
Use MSI chip framework instead of arch MSI functions to configure
MSI/MSI-X irq. So we can manage MSI/MSI-X irq in a unified
On 2014/9/10 20:36, David Vrabel wrote:
> On 05/09/14 11:09, Yijing Wang wrote:
>> Commit 0e4ccb150 added two __weak arch functions arch_msix_mask_irq()
>> and arch_msi_mask_irq() to fix a bug found when running xen in x86.
>> Introduced these two funcntions make MSI code complex. And mask/unmask
>
On 09/10/2014 05:48 PM, James Bottomley wrote:
> On Tue, 2014-09-09 at 06:40 -0400, Peter Hurley wrote:
>> On 09/08/2014 10:56 PM, James Bottomley wrote:
>>> On Mon, 2014-09-08 at 19:30 -0400, Peter Hurley wrote:
On 09/08/2014 01:50 AM, James Bottomley wrote:
>> But additionally, even if g
On 10.09.2014 [12:06:16 -0700], Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Sep 2014 17:47:23 -0700 Nishanth Aravamudan
> wrote:
>
> > On 09.09.2014 [17:11:15 -0700], Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > On Tue, 9 Sep 2014 12:03:27 -0700 Nishanth Aravamudan
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > From: Joonsoo Kim
> > > >
>
The ibm,ppc-interrupt-server#s property is in big endian format.
These values need to be converted when used by little endian
architectures.
Signed-off-by: Thomas Falcon
---
arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/dlpar.c | 6 +++---
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/powe
When removing a cpu, this patch makes sure that values
gotten from or passed to firmware are in the correct
endian format.
Signed-off-by: Thomas Falcon
---
arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/dlpar.c | 14 +++---
arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/hotplug-cpu.c | 8
2 files change
On Tue, 2014-09-09 at 06:40 -0400, Peter Hurley wrote:
> On 09/08/2014 10:56 PM, James Bottomley wrote:
> > On Mon, 2014-09-08 at 19:30 -0400, Peter Hurley wrote:
> >> On 09/08/2014 01:50 AM, James Bottomley wrote:
> But additionally, even if gcc combines adjacent writes _that are part
>
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 3:18 PM, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> On 09/08/2014 10:52 AM, One Thousand Gnomes wrote:
>>
>> I think the whole "removing Alpha EV5" support is basically bonkers. Just
>> use set_bit in the tty layer. Alpha will continue to work as well as it
>> always has done and you won't de
On 09/08/2014 10:52 AM, One Thousand Gnomes wrote:
>
> I think the whole "removing Alpha EV5" support is basically bonkers. Just
> use set_bit in the tty layer. Alpha will continue to work as well as it
> always has done and you won't design out support for any future processor
> that turns out no
of_device_ids (i.e. compatible strings and the respective data) are not
supposed to change at runtime. All functions working with of_device_ids
provided by work with const of_device_ids. This allows to
mark all struct of_device_id const, too.
While touching these line also put the __init annotati
On Tue, 9 Sep 2014 17:47:23 -0700 Nishanth Aravamudan
wrote:
> On 09.09.2014 [17:11:15 -0700], Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Tue, 9 Sep 2014 12:03:27 -0700 Nishanth Aravamudan
> > wrote:
> >
> > > From: Joonsoo Kim
> > >
> > > We need to determine the fallback node in slub allocator if the
>
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 04:12:53PM +0800, Shengjiu Wang wrote:
> > Then we can get a patch like:
> > open() {
> > + clk_prepare_enable();
> >
> > }
> >
> > close() {
> >
> > + clk_disable_unprepare()
> > }
> what is the open() and close()? do you mean the fsl_ssi_startup()
>
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 05:38:10PM +0200, Takashi Iwai wrote:
> At Wed, 10 Sep 2014 20:37:50 +0530,
> Sudip Mukherjee wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 04:43:03PM +0200, Takashi Iwai wrote:
> > > At Wed, 10 Sep 2014 20:02:04 +0530,
> > > Sudip Mukherjee wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Sep 10,
At Wed, 10 Sep 2014 20:37:50 +0530,
Sudip Mukherjee wrote:
>
> On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 04:43:03PM +0200, Takashi Iwai wrote:
> > At Wed, 10 Sep 2014 20:02:04 +0530,
> > Sudip Mukherjee wrote:
> > >
> > > On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 03:57:04PM +0200, Johannes Berg wrote:
> > > > On Wed, 2014-09-10 at
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 04:43:03PM +0200, Takashi Iwai wrote:
> At Wed, 10 Sep 2014 20:02:04 +0530,
> Sudip Mukherjee wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 03:57:04PM +0200, Johannes Berg wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2014-09-10 at 19:21 +0530, Sudip Mukherjee wrote:
> > > > as pr_* macros are more preffe
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 01:38:25PM +0100, David Vrabel wrote:
> On 09/09/14 03:06, Yijing Wang wrote:
> > On 2014/9/5 22:29, David Vrabel wrote:
> >> On 05/09/14 11:09, Yijing Wang wrote:
> >>> Use MSI chip framework instead of arch MSI functions to configure
> >>> MSI/MSI-X irq. So we can manage M
At Wed, 10 Sep 2014 20:02:04 +0530,
Sudip Mukherjee wrote:
>
> On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 03:57:04PM +0200, Johannes Berg wrote:
> > On Wed, 2014-09-10 at 19:21 +0530, Sudip Mukherjee wrote:
> > > as pr_* macros are more preffered over printk, so printk replaced
> > > with corresponding pr_* macros.
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 03:57:04PM +0200, Johannes Berg wrote:
> On Wed, 2014-09-10 at 19:21 +0530, Sudip Mukherjee wrote:
> > as pr_* macros are more preffered over printk, so printk replaced
> > with corresponding pr_* macros.
>
> Are you simply running checkpatch on every file and decided to do
On Wed, 2014-09-10 at 19:21 +0530, Sudip Mukherjee wrote:
> as pr_* macros are more preffered over printk, so printk replaced
> with corresponding pr_* macros.
Are you simply running checkpatch on every file and decided to do
something about it? :)
I'll let Takashi decide whether to take this or
as pr_* macros are more preffered over printk, so printk replaced
with corresponding pr_* macros.
this patch will generate warning from checkpatch as it only did printk
replacement and didnot fixed the other warning of :
Alignment should match open parenthesis and
Possible unnecessary 'out of memo
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 02:26:54AM -0500, Chuck Ebbert wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Sep 2014 10:42:27 +0100
> Aaron Tomlin wrote:
>
> > +void task_stack_end_magic(struct task_struct *tsk)
> > +{
> > + unsigned long *stackend;
> > +
> > + stackend = end_of_stack(tsk);
> > + *stackend = STACK_END_MAGI
On 09/09/14 03:06, Yijing Wang wrote:
> On 2014/9/5 22:29, David Vrabel wrote:
>> On 05/09/14 11:09, Yijing Wang wrote:
>>> Use MSI chip framework instead of arch MSI functions to configure
>>> MSI/MSI-X irq. So we can manage MSI/MSI-X irq in a unified framework.
>> [...]
>>> --- a/arch/x86/pci/xen
On 05/09/14 11:09, Yijing Wang wrote:
> Commit 0e4ccb150 added two __weak arch functions arch_msix_mask_irq()
> and arch_msi_mask_irq() to fix a bug found when running xen in x86.
> Introduced these two funcntions make MSI code complex. And mask/unmask
> is the irq actions related to interrupt cont
On 09.09.14 19:07, Madhavan Srinivasan wrote:
> This patch extends the use of illegal instruction as software
> breakpoint instruction across the ppc platform. Patch extends
> booke program interrupt code to support software breakpoint.
>
> Signed-off-by: Madhavan Srinivasan
> ---
> Patch is on
Hi,
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 06:30:06PM +0800, Shengjiu Wang wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 08:21:18AM +0200, Markus Pargmann wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 09, 2014 at 11:38:05AM -0700, Nicolin Chen wrote:
> > > On Tue, Sep 09, 2014 at 05:18:07PM +0800, Shengjiu Wang wrote:
> > > > @@ -1321,7 +1333,11 @
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 08:21:18AM +0200, Markus Pargmann wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 09, 2014 at 11:38:05AM -0700, Nicolin Chen wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 09, 2014 at 05:18:07PM +0800, Shengjiu Wang wrote:
> > > @@ -1321,7 +1333,11 @@ static int fsl_ssi_probe(struct platform_device
> > > *pdev)
> > >
On Tue, Sep 09, 2014 at 12:59:29PM -0700, Nicolin Chen wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 09, 2014 at 02:37:42PM -0500, Timur Tabi wrote:
> > On 09/09/2014 01:38 PM, Nicolin Chen wrote:
> > >make sure to have the call for imx only because it seems that
> > >the other platforms do not depend on the clock.
> >
>
On Tue, Sep 09, 2014 at 11:38:05AM -0700, Nicolin Chen wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 09, 2014 at 05:18:07PM +0800, Shengjiu Wang wrote:
> > @@ -1321,7 +1333,11 @@ static int fsl_ssi_probe(struct platform_device
> > *pdev)
> > return -ENOMEM;
> > }
> >
> > - ssi_private->regs = devm_regm
On Tue, 9 Sep 2014 10:42:27 +0100
Aaron Tomlin wrote:
> +void task_stack_end_magic(struct task_struct *tsk)
> +{
> + unsigned long *stackend;
> +
> + stackend = end_of_stack(tsk);
> + *stackend = STACK_END_MAGIC;/* for overflow detection */
> +}
> +
For clarity this should proba
37 matches
Mail list logo
