Thread (4 messages) 4 messages, 2 authors, 2014-03-25

PATCH[60485 Bug adding breakpoint]

From: Nick Krause <hidden>
Date: 2014-03-22 21:53:14
Also in: lkml

Here is my new patch as corrected for the the bug 60845.
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=60845
This is the link to the bug and my comments / conversation on to get the corrections needed.
Below is my patch for the bug, please let me know if it gets added finally .
--- linux-3.13.6/arch/mips/pci/msi-octeon.c.orig    2014-03-22 17:32:44.762754254 -0400
+++ linux-3.13.6/arch/mips/pci/msi-octeon.c    2014-03-22 17:34:19.974753699 -0400
@@ -150,6 +150,7 @@ msi_irq_allocated:
         msg.address_lo =
             ((128ul << 20) + CVMX_PCI_MSI_RCV) & 0xffffffff;
         msg.address_hi = ((128ul << 20) + CVMX_PCI_MSI_RCV)>> 32;
+        break;
     case OCTEON_DMA_BAR_TYPE_BIG:
         /* When using big bar, Bar 0 is based at 0 */
         msg.address_lo = (0 + CVMX_PCI_MSI_RCV) & 0xffffffff;
Signed-off-by: nickkrause@sympatico.ca
Nick
 		 	   		  
From macro@linux-mips.org Sat Mar 22 23:21:05 2014
Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list linux-mips); Sat, 22 Mar 2014 23:21:07 +0100 (CET)
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1]:50931 "EHLO
        localhost.localdomain" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK)
        by eddie.linux-mips.org with ESMTP id S6816015AbaCVWVFDKnWt (ORCPT
        <rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org>); Sat, 22 Mar 2014 23:21:05 +0100
Date:   Sat, 22 Mar 2014 22:21:04 +0000 (GMT)
From:   "Maciej W. Rozycki" <redacted>
To:     "Steven J. Hill" <redacted>
cc:     linux-mips@linux-mips.org, Ralf Baechle <redacted>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] MIPS: Add 1074K CPU support explicitly.
In-Reply-To: [ref]
Message-ID: [ref]
References: [ref]
User-Agent: Alpine 2.10 (LFD 1266 2009-07-14)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Return-Path: [off-list ref]
X-Envelope-To: <"|/home/ecartis/ecartis -s linux-mips"> (uid 0)
X-Orcpt: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org
Original-Recipient: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org
X-archive-position: 39554
X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0
Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org
Errors-to: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org
X-original-sender: macro@linux-mips.org
Precedence: bulk
List-help: <mailto:ecartis@linux-mips.org?Subject=help>
List-unsubscribe: <mailto:ecartis@linux-mips.org?subject=unsubscribe%20linux-mips>
List-software: Ecartis version 1.0.0
List-Id: linux-mips <linux-mips.eddie.linux-mips.org>
X-List-ID: linux-mips <linux-mips.eddie.linux-mips.org>
List-subscribe: <mailto:ecartis@linux-mips.org?subject=subscribe%20linux-mips>
List-owner: <mailto:ralf@linux-mips.org>
List-post: <mailto:linux-mips@linux-mips.org>
List-archive: <http://www.linux-mips.org/archives/linux-mips/>
X-list: linux-mips
Content-Length: 1451
Lines: 49

On Fri, 17 Jan 2014, Steven J. Hill wrote:
From: "Steven J. Hill" <redacted>

The 1074K is a multiprocessing coherent processing system (CPS) based
on modified 74K cores. This patch makes the 1074K an actual unique
CPU type, instead of a 74K derivative, which it is not.

Signed-off-by: Steven J. Hill <redacted>
Reviewed-by: Leonid Yegoshin <redacted>
---
[...]
quoted hunk
diff --git a/arch/mips/mm/c-r4k.c b/arch/mips/mm/c-r4k.c
index 13b549a..7184363 100644
--- a/arch/mips/mm/c-r4k.c
+++ b/arch/mips/mm/c-r4k.c
@@ -1106,9 +1106,10 @@ static void probe_pcache(void)
 	case CPU_34K:
 	case CPU_74K:
 	case CPU_1004K:
+	case CPU_1074K:
 	case CPU_INTERAPTIV:
 	case CPU_PROAPTIV:
-		if (current_cpu_type() == CPU_74K)
+		if ((c->cputype == CPU_74K) || (c->cputype == CPU_1074K))
 			alias_74k_erratum(c);
 		if ((read_c0_config7() & (1 << 16))) {
 			/* effectively physically indexed dcache,
 Hmm, wouldn't it make sense to avoid the repeated condition check and 
make it:

	case CPU_74K:
	case CPU_1074K:
		alias_74k_erratum(c);
		/* Fall through. */
	case CPU_M14KC:
	case CPU_M14KEC:
	case CPU_24K:
	case CPU_34K:
 	case CPU_INTERAPTIV:
 	case CPU_PROAPTIV:
 		if ((read_c0_config7() & (1 << 16))) {
 			/* effectively physically indexed dcache,
	
or suchlike instead?  Also why `c->cputype == CPU_74K' rather than 
`current_cpu_type() == CPU_74K'?

  Maciej
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help