On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 11:39:21AM -0500, Matthew McClintock wrote:
On Thu, 2010-07-15 at 10:22 -0600, Grant Likely wrote:
Thanks for taking a look. My first thought was to just blow away all
the
memreserve regions and start over. But, there are reserve regions
for
other things that
On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 01:18:21PM -0600, Grant Likely wrote:
On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 12:58 PM, Matthew McClintock m...@freescale.com
wrote:
On Thu, 2010-07-15 at 12:37 -0600, Grant Likely wrote:
On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 12:03 PM, Matthew McClintock m...@freescale.com
wrote:
Yes. Where
On Sun, 18 Jul 2010 22:32:38 -0600
Grant Likely grant.lik...@secretlab.ca wrote:
On Sun, Jul 18, 2010 at 10:28 PM, Matthew McClintock m...@freescale.com
wrote:
Upon first examining the details of getting kexec working on our platform I
noticed our device tree passed from u-boot contained
On Thu, 2010-07-15 at 00:21 -0600, Grant Likely wrote:
On Wed, Jul 14, 2010 at 9:18 AM, Matthew McClintock m...@freescale.com
wrote:
To build a proper flat device tree for kexec we need to know which
memreserve region was used for the device tree for the currently
running kernel, so we
On Thu, 2010-07-15 at 10:22 -0600, Grant Likely wrote:
What is your starting point? Where does the device tree (and
memreserve list) come from
that you're passing to kexec? My first impression is that if you have
to scrub the memreserve list, then the source being used to
obtain the
On Jul 17, 2010, at 11:41 AM, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
Yes. Where would we get a list of memreserve sections?
I would say the list of reserves that are not under the control of
Linux should be explicitly described in the device tree proper. For
instance, if you have a region that
On Jul 18, 2010, at 6:41 PM, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
On Thu, 2010-07-15 at 00:21 -0600, Grant Likely wrote:
On Wed, Jul 14, 2010 at 9:18 AM, Matthew McClintock m...@freescale.com
wrote:
To build a proper flat device tree for kexec we need to know which
memreserve region was used for
On Sun, Jul 18, 2010 at 10:28 PM, Matthew McClintock m...@freescale.com wrote:
On Jul 18, 2010, at 6:41 PM, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
On Thu, 2010-07-15 at 00:21 -0600, Grant Likely wrote:
On Wed, Jul 14, 2010 at 9:18 AM, Matthew McClintock m...@freescale.com
wrote:
To build a proper
On Jul 18, 2010, at 7:09 PM, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
On Thu, 2010-07-15 at 10:22 -0600, Grant Likely wrote:
What is your starting point? Where does the device tree (and
memreserve list) come from
that you're passing to kexec? My first impression is that if you have
to scrub the
On Wed, Jul 14, 2010 at 9:18 AM, Matthew McClintock m...@freescale.com wrote:
To build a proper flat device tree for kexec we need to know which
memreserve region was used for the device tree for the currently
running kernel, so we can remove it and replace it with the new
memreserve for the
On Wed, 2010-07-14 at 17:46 +0200, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
What about just one node called flat-device-tree?
But *what* flat device tree? It cannot be the flat device tree,
or it would be useless information, since we are already reading it!
I thought about it all day and did not come
On Thu, 2010-07-15 at 00:21 -0600, Grant Likely wrote:
On Wed, Jul 14, 2010 at 9:18 AM, Matthew McClintock
m...@freescale.com wrote:
To build a proper flat device tree for kexec we need to know which
memreserve region was used for the device tree for the currently
running kernel, so we can
On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 9:19 AM, Matthew McClintock m...@freescale.com wrote:
On Thu, 2010-07-15 at 00:21 -0600, Grant Likely wrote:
On Wed, Jul 14, 2010 at 9:18 AM, Matthew McClintock
m...@freescale.com wrote:
To build a proper flat device tree for kexec we need to know which
memreserve
On Thu, 2010-07-15 at 10:22 -0600, Grant Likely wrote:
Thanks for taking a look. My first thought was to just blow away all
the
memreserve regions and start over. But, there are reserve regions
for
other things that I might not want to blow away. For example, on
mpc85xx
SMP systems we
On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 10:39 AM, Matthew McClintock m...@freescale.com wrote:
On Thu, 2010-07-15 at 10:22 -0600, Grant Likely wrote:
Thanks for taking a look. My first thought was to just blow away all
the
memreserve regions and start over. But, there are reserve regions
for
other things
On Thu, 2010-07-15 at 10:57 -0600, Grant Likely wrote:
On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 10:39 AM, Matthew McClintock m...@freescale.com
wrote:
On Thu, 2010-07-15 at 10:22 -0600, Grant Likely wrote:
Thanks for taking a look. My first thought was to just blow away all
the
memreserve regions and
On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 12:03 PM, Matthew McClintock m...@freescale.com wrote:
On Thu, 2010-07-15 at 10:57 -0600, Grant Likely wrote:
On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 10:39 AM, Matthew McClintock m...@freescale.com
wrote:
On Thu, 2010-07-15 at 10:22 -0600, Grant Likely wrote:
Thanks for taking a
On Thu, 2010-07-15 at 12:37 -0600, Grant Likely wrote:
On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 12:03 PM, Matthew McClintock m...@freescale.com
wrote:
On Thu, 2010-07-15 at 10:57 -0600, Grant Likely wrote:
On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 10:39 AM, Matthew McClintock m...@freescale.com
wrote:
On Thu,
On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 12:58 PM, Matthew McClintock m...@freescale.com wrote:
On Thu, 2010-07-15 at 12:37 -0600, Grant Likely wrote:
On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 12:03 PM, Matthew McClintock m...@freescale.com
wrote:
Yes. Where would we get a list of memreserve sections?
I would say the list
Grant Likely wrote:
On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 12:58 PM, Matthew McClintock m...@freescale.com wrote:
On Thu, 2010-07-15 at 12:37 -0600, Grant Likely wrote:
On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 12:03 PM, Matthew McClintock m...@freescale.com wrote:
Yes. Where would we get a list of memreserve
To build a proper flat device tree for kexec we need to know which
memreserve region was used for the device tree for the currently
running kernel, so we can remove it and replace it with the new
memreserve for the kexec'ed kernel
Signed-off-by: Matthew McClintock m...@freescale.com
---
V4: Fixed
V4: Fixed misspelling
Any particular reason you fixed only one of the two
mispelings I pointed out? (device tree is two words,
not one).
+ prop = of_find_property(node, linux,devicetree-start, NULL);
+ if (prop)
+ prom_remove_property(node, prop);
+
+ prop =
On Wed, 2010-07-14 at 17:35 +0200, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
V4: Fixed misspelling
Any particular reason you fixed only one of the two
mispelings I pointed out? (device tree is two words,
not one).
Ahh, my fault.
+ prop = of_find_property(node, linux,devicetree-start, NULL);
+
Any particular reason you fixed only one of the two
mispelings I pointed out? (device tree is two words,
not one).
Ahh, my fault.
Well I wasn't terribly clear ;-)
You could use one property instead of two; use addr+len
like every other property does.
You also should use a better name for
Matthew McClintock wrote:
+static struct property flat_dt_start_prop = {
+ .name = linux,devicetree-start,
+ .length = sizeof(phys_addr_t),
+ .value =flat_dt_start,
+};
+
+static struct property flat_dt_end_prop = {
+ .name = linux,devicetree-end,
+ .length =
25 matches
Mail list logo
