Dear list,
I have just compiled linux-2.6.24 for a MPC8540 target using a MPC8540
specific gcc.
I then got tan infinity of "SPE used in kernel" messages. Looking at the
sources I ifdeffed out the printk call in KernelSPE, and I now have a
silent kernel, that seems to work fine.
Is there somethi
> I wonder why a kernel configured for E500 and compiled by a E500-specific gcc
> triggers this message. Is it invalid to use SPE instructions in the kernel
> or do I misunderstand the message ?
I think it's like floating point/altivec, we don't always save the FP
registers on kernel/userspace
On Feb 22, 2008, at 03:50, Philippe De Muyter wrote:
> Dear list,
>
> I have just compiled linux-2.6.24 for a MPC8540 target using a MPC8540
> specific gcc.
>
> I then got tan infinity of "SPE used in kernel" messages. Looking
> at the
> sources I ifdeffed out the printk call in KernelSPE, and
On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 12:33:19PM -0600, Andy Fleming wrote:
>
> On Feb 22, 2008, at 03:50, Philippe De Muyter wrote:
>
>> Dear list,
>>
>> I have just compiled linux-2.6.24 for a MPC8540 target using a MPC8540
>> specific gcc.
>>
>> I then got tan infinity of "SPE used in kernel" messages. Looki
> My first trial used ARCH=ppc and caused this infinity of "SPE used in kernel"
> messages, but I then recompiled linux with ARCH=powerpc. With the message
> not ifdef'ed out, this second kernel does not emit "SPE used in kernel"
> messages,
If I were to venture a guess I'd point to the fact tha
Hi Johanness,
On Sat, Feb 23, 2008 at 10:51:08AM +0100, Johannes Berg wrote:
>
> > My first trial used ARCH=ppc and caused this infinity of "SPE used in
> > kernel"
> > messages, but I then recompiled linux with ARCH=powerpc. With the message
> > not ifdef'ed out, this second kernel does not em
> But as I said in the same mail, processes still dies unexpectedly.
Yeah, no idea though. I guess you could try putting that into the
arch/ppc Makefile, but arch/ppc will be removed this year so you don't
want to rely on it.
johannes
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed messa
On Feb 23, 2008, at 4:25 AM, Johannes Berg wrote:
>
>> But as I said in the same mail, processes still dies unexpectedly.
>
> Yeah, no idea though. I guess you could try putting that into the
> arch/ppc Makefile, but arch/ppc will be removed this year so you don't
> want to rely on it.
Its been
Hi Kumar,
On Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 01:39:20AM -0600, Kumar Gala wrote:
>
> On Feb 23, 2008, at 4:25 AM, Johannes Berg wrote:
>
>>
>>> But as I said in the same mail, processes still dies unexpectedly.
>>
>> Yeah, no idea though. I guess you could try putting that into the
>> arch/ppc Makefile, but
