Roger Pau Monné writes:
> On Mon, Dec 12, 2022 at 01:36:48PM +0100, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
>> On Fri, Dec 02, 2022 at 12:40:05PM +0100, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
>> > On Wed, Nov 30, 2022 at 05:08:06PM -0800, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
>> > > On Wed, 30 Nov 2022, Roger Pau Monne wrote:
>> > > > The
arch/powerpc/include/asm/book3s/64/pgtable.h | 4 ++--
> arch/powerpc/include/asm/nohash/32/pgtable.h | 2 +-
> arch/powerpc/include/asm/nohash/32/pte-8xx.h | 2 +-
> arch/powerpc/include/asm/nohash/64/pgtable.h | 2 +-
Looks like you discovered the joys of ppc's at-least 5 different MMU
implementations, sorry :)
Acked-by: Michael Ellerman (powerpc)
cheers
"Guilherme G. Piccoli" writes:
> On 05/05/2022 15:55, Hari Bathini wrote:
>> [...]
>> The change looks good. I have tested it on an LPAR (ppc64).
>>
>> Reviewed-by: Hari Bathini
>>
>
> Hi Michael. do you think it's possible to add this one to powerpc/next
> (or something like that), or do you
Cédric Le Goater writes:
> Hello Thomas,
>
> On 12/6/21 23:27, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>> This code is broken since day one. ppc4xx_setup_msi_irqs() has the
>> following gems:
>>
>> 1) The handling of the result of msi_bitmap_alloc_hwirqs() is completely
>> broken:
>>
>> When
David Hildenbrand writes:
> On 09.09.20 09:17, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
>> On Tue, Sep 08, 2020 at 10:10:08PM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>>> We soon want to pass flags, e.g., to mark added System RAM resources.
>>> mergeable. Prepare for that.
>>
>> What are these random "flags", and how
trivial
>>functions added in powerpc and microblaze adding the calls
>>need to be removed for the code to compile. This will not show up
>>as a merge conflict and needs to be dealt with manually!
>
>So I haven't gotten the powerpc or microblaze pull requests yet, so
&
John Hubbard writes:
> On 8/7/19 10:42 PM, Michael Ellerman wrote:
>> Hi John,
>>
>> john.hubb...@gmail.com writes:
>>> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/mm/book3s64/iommu_api.c
>>> b/arch/powerpc/mm/book3s64/iommu_api.c
>>> index b056cae3388b..e12619
Hi John,
john.hubb...@gmail.com writes:
> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/mm/book3s64/iommu_api.c
> b/arch/powerpc/mm/book3s64/iommu_api.c
> index b056cae3388b..e126193ba295 100644
> --- a/arch/powerpc/mm/book3s64/iommu_api.c
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/mm/book3s64/iommu_api.c
> @@ -203,6 +202,7 @@ static
Mike Rapoport writes:
> Currently, memblock has several internal functions with overlapping
> functionality. They all call memblock_find_in_range_node() to find free
> memory and then reserve the allocated range and mark it with kmemleak.
> However, there is difference in the allocation
Michael Ellerman writes:
> Mike Rapoport writes:
>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/numa.c b/arch/arm64/mm/numa.c
>> index ae34e3a..2c61ea4 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/mm/numa.c
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/mm/numa.c
>> @@ -237,6 +237,10 @@ static void __init setup_node_
pr_info("Initmem setup node %d []\n", nid);
>
> nd_pa = memblock_phys_alloc_try_nid(nd_size, SMP_CACHE_BYTES, nid);
> + if (!nd_pa)
> + panic("Cannot allocate %zu bytes for node %d data\n",
> + nd_size, nid);
&
el/paca.c| 6 +-
> arch/powerpc/kernel/prom.c| 5 -
> arch/powerpc/kernel/setup_32.c| 26 --
> 5 files changed, 26 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)
LGTM.
Acked-by: Michael Ellerman
cheers
_
12 matches
Mail list logo
