On Sat, 2009-08-01 at 10:00 +0100, David Woodhouse wrote:
> I'm not sure. Losing 16MiB on a machine which only has 512MiB anyway
> doesn't seem ideal, and we'll want to make the no-iommu code DTRT
> _anyway_, surely?
>
> So we might as well let the DART keep its existing logic (which is
> only
> to
On Sat, 2009-08-01 at 14:29 +0100, David Woodhouse wrote:
> This seems to be the reason why the Fedora rawhide 2.6.31-rc kernel
> doesn't boot. With some CPUs, cur_cpu_spec->oprofile_cpu_type can be
> NULL -- which makes strcmp() unhappy.
>
> Signed-off-by: David Woodhouse
Thanks David !
Acked-
From: Julia Lawall
Error handling code following a kzalloc should free the allocated data.
The semantic match that finds the problem is as follows:
(http://www.emn.fr/x-info/coccinelle/)
//
@r exists@
local idexpression x;
statement S;
expression E;
identifier f,f1,l;
position p1,p2;
expressio
From: Julia Lawall
The kernel.h macro DIV_ROUND_CLOSEST performs the computation (x + d/2)/d
but is perhaps more readable.
The semantic patch that makes this change is as follows:
(http://www.emn.fr/x-info/coccinelle/)
//
@haskernel@
@@
#include
@depends on haskernel@
expression x,__divisor
Hey Benjamin,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt schreef:
On Thu, 2009-07-30 at 01:42 +0200, Stef Simoens wrote:
What would be the best approach?
- if the kernel boots, it's obviously 'good'
- but what if the kernel hits the 'BUG', should I apply your patch
then? If it doesn't work with your patch, woul
On Sun, 2009-08-02 at 10:52 +0200, Stef Simoens wrote:
> Hey Benjamin,
>
Thanks for the bisection. I'll have a look when I'm back from skiing :-)
In the meantime, maybe Fujita has an idea ?
Mesh is an old crappy piece of HW with an old driver full of dark
secrets that Paulus wrote eons ago, so I'
As we know, we can't turn off MMU on E500.
I want to setup a 1:1 mapping on SMP E500 v2, and I used 4 Entries of
256M to form a 1G mapping.
Here are my codes, but when I used rfi , it didn't jump to the
required instruction.
0---256M:
lis r6,FSL_BOOKE_MAS0(1, 14, 0)@h
On Sat, 2009-08-01 at 08:29 +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> On Thu, 2009-07-30 at 22:35 -0500, Kumar Gala wrote:
> > > /* XXX This clear should ultimately be part of
> > local_flush_tlb_mm */
> > > - __clear_bit(id, stale_map[cpu]);
> > > + for (cpu = cp
On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 10:27:43AM +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> On Tue, 2009-06-23 at 09:56 -0400, Neil Horman wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 06:25:34PM +0530, M. Mohan Kumar wrote:
> > >
> > Well it definately looks like removing that variable had some code changes.
> > It'll take some ti
