All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
To: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>
Cc: Dave Martin <dave.martin@linaro.org>,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	Nicolas Pitre <nicolas.pitre@linaro.org>,
	Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com>,
	Santosh Shilimkar <santosh.shilimkar@ti.com>,
	linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, Jean Pihet <j-pihet@ti.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] ARM: Define wfi() macro for v6 processors
Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2011 17:47:18 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <201102081747.18674.arnd@arndb.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110208162515.GB6188@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>

On Tuesday 08 February 2011 17:25:16 Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 08, 2011 at 04:15:15PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > But that doesn't work if you build a combined v5/v6/v7 kernel, because
> > v5 supports neither form, right? I think to do that, it needs the
> > same kind of abstraction that we have for a number of other things
> > like cache management in arch/arm/mm/.
> 
> The options are kernels which support v3-v5 or v6-v7.  There's too big
> a change between v5 and v6 to combine those into one kernel.

Ah, good to know. I never realized this with the common binary discussions.
Building for the versatile/realview platform makes it possible to select
any of ARM926 and the v6/v6k/v7 CPUs, as well as ARM7TDMI in the same
kernel config, so I assumed that this was actually a valid configuration
aside from bugs.

Would an attempt to make a combined v5/v6 kernel result in unacceptably
bad code, or is this just too much work for anyone to be bothered with
and little practical value?

	Arnd

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: arnd@arndb.de (Arnd Bergmann)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH v2] ARM: Define wfi() macro for v6 processors
Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2011 17:47:18 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <201102081747.18674.arnd@arndb.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110208162515.GB6188@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>

On Tuesday 08 February 2011 17:25:16 Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 08, 2011 at 04:15:15PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > But that doesn't work if you build a combined v5/v6/v7 kernel, because
> > v5 supports neither form, right? I think to do that, it needs the
> > same kind of abstraction that we have for a number of other things
> > like cache management in arch/arm/mm/.
> 
> The options are kernels which support v3-v5 or v6-v7.  There's too big
> a change between v5 and v6 to combine those into one kernel.

Ah, good to know. I never realized this with the common binary discussions.
Building for the versatile/realview platform makes it possible to select
any of ARM926 and the v6/v6k/v7 CPUs, as well as ARM7TDMI in the same
kernel config, so I assumed that this was actually a valid configuration
aside from bugs.

Would an attempt to make a combined v5/v6 kernel result in unacceptably
bad code, or is this just too much work for anyone to be bothered with
and little practical value?

	Arnd

  parent reply	other threads:[~2011-02-08 16:47 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 54+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-02-08 11:01 [PATCH v2] ARM: Define wfi() macro for v6 processors Dave Martin
2011-02-08 11:01 ` Dave Martin
2011-02-08 11:08 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-02-08 11:08   ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-02-08 11:16   ` Dave Martin
2011-02-08 11:16     ` Dave Martin
2011-02-08 12:11   ` Arnd Bergmann
2011-02-08 12:11     ` Arnd Bergmann
2011-02-08 12:13     ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-02-08 12:13       ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-02-08 12:53       ` Arnd Bergmann
2011-02-08 12:53         ` Arnd Bergmann
2011-02-08 14:45         ` Dave Martin
2011-02-08 14:45           ` Dave Martin
2011-02-08 14:54           ` Santosh Shilimkar
2011-02-08 14:54             ` Santosh Shilimkar
2011-02-08 15:09             ` Dave Martin
2011-02-08 15:09               ` Dave Martin
2011-02-08 15:17               ` Arnd Bergmann
2011-02-08 15:17                 ` Arnd Bergmann
2011-02-08 16:32                 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-02-08 16:32                   ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-02-08 16:58                   ` Arnd Bergmann
2011-02-08 16:58                     ` Arnd Bergmann
2011-02-08 17:15                     ` Dave Martin
2011-02-08 17:15                       ` Dave Martin
2011-02-08 15:15           ` Arnd Bergmann
2011-02-08 15:15             ` Arnd Bergmann
2011-02-08 15:30             ` Dave Martin
2011-02-08 15:30               ` Dave Martin
2011-02-08 15:42               ` Arnd Bergmann
2011-02-08 15:42                 ` Arnd Bergmann
2011-02-08 16:21                 ` Dave Martin
2011-02-08 16:21                   ` Dave Martin
2011-02-09 10:07                   ` Arnd Bergmann
2011-02-09 10:07                     ` Arnd Bergmann
2011-02-08 16:25             ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-02-08 16:25               ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-02-08 16:31               ` Dave Martin
2011-02-08 16:31                 ` Dave Martin
2011-02-08 16:47               ` Arnd Bergmann [this message]
2011-02-08 16:47                 ` Arnd Bergmann
2011-02-08 16:55                 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-02-08 16:55                   ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-02-08 17:00                   ` Dave Martin
2011-02-08 17:00                     ` Dave Martin
2011-02-08 16:20           ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-02-08 16:20             ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-02-08 16:28             ` Dave Martin
2011-02-08 16:28               ` Dave Martin
2011-02-08 12:22     ` Dave Martin
2011-02-08 12:22       ` Dave Martin
2011-02-08 12:31       ` Santosh Shilimkar
2011-02-08 12:31         ` Santosh Shilimkar

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=201102081747.18674.arnd@arndb.de \
    --to=arnd@arndb.de \
    --cc=dave.martin@linaro.org \
    --cc=j-pihet@ti.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-omap@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux@arm.linux.org.uk \
    --cc=nicolas.pitre@linaro.org \
    --cc=santosh.shilimkar@ti.com \
    --cc=tony@atomide.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.