To: Meador Inge
> Cc: Hollis Blanchard; devicetree-disc...@lists.ozlabs.org; linuxppc-
> d...@lists.ozlabs.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/4] powerpc: Removing support for 'protected-
> sources'
>
>
> > In my previous reply I said that "it is not so muc
On 02/07/2011 03:45 PM, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
In my previous reply I said that "it is not so much as a need as it is a
potential simplification." After further reflection, I don't think that
is completely true. As we get into AMP systems with higher core counts,
then implementing this
> In my previous reply I said that "it is not so much as a need as it is a
> potential simplification." After further reflection, I don't think that
> is completely true. As we get into AMP systems with higher core counts,
> then implementing this functionality using the existing
> "protecte
On 02/06/2011 05:35 PM, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
On Fri, 2011-02-04 at 17:25 -0600, Meador Inge wrote:
In a recent thread [1,2,3] concerning device trees for AMP systems, the
question of whether we really need 'protected-sources' arose. The general
consensus was that a new boolean property
On Sun, 2011-02-06 at 19:32 -0600, Meador Inge wrote:
> So barring the removal of protected sources, does the inclusion of the
> "pic-no-reset" property seem reasonable?
Sure.
Ben.
___
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
https://l
On 02/06/2011 05:35 PM, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
On Fri, 2011-02-04 at 17:25 -0600, Meador Inge wrote:
In a recent thread [1,2,3] concerning device trees for AMP systems, the
question of whether we really need 'protected-sources' arose. The general
consensus was that a new boolean property
On Fri, 2011-02-04 at 17:25 -0600, Meador Inge wrote:
> In a recent thread [1,2,3] concerning device trees for AMP systems, the
> question of whether we really need 'protected-sources' arose. The general
> consensus was that a new boolean property 'pic-no-reset' (described in more
> detail in a fo
In a recent thread [1,2,3] concerning device trees for AMP systems, the
question of whether we really need 'protected-sources' arose. The general
consensus was that a new boolean property 'pic-no-reset' (described in more
detail in a following patch) could be expanded to cover the use cases that
'