From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list linux-mips); Tue, 08 Apr 2014 00:23:01 +0200 (CEST) Received: from elvis.franken.de ([193.175.24.41]:51335 "EHLO elvis.franken.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by eddie.linux-mips.org with ESMTP id S6816886AbaDGWW6HJtbe (ORCPT ); Tue, 8 Apr 2014 00:22:58 +0200 Received: from uucp (helo=solo.franken.de) by elvis.franken.de with local-bsmtp (Exim 3.36 #1) id 1WXHwP-0000dj-00; Tue, 08 Apr 2014 00:22:57 +0200 Received: by solo.franken.de (Postfix, from userid 1000) id B430F1BB731; Tue, 8 Apr 2014 00:19:20 +0200 (CEST) Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2014 00:19:20 +0200 From: Thomas Bogendoerfer To: "Maciej W. Rozycki" Cc: Ralf Baechle , linux-mips@linux-mips.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] DEC/SNI: O32 wrapper stack switching fixes Message-ID: <20140407221920.GA9418@alpha.franken.de> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Return-Path: 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: 39690 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: tsbogend@alpha.franken.de Precedence: bulk List-help: List-unsubscribe: List-software: Ecartis version 1.0.0 List-Id: linux-mips X-List-ID: linux-mips List-subscribe: List-owner: List-post: List-archive: X-list: linux-mips On Tue, Apr 01, 2014 at 12:14:41AM +0100, Maciej W. Rozycki wrote: > Please verify this works for your system. works on a RM200 system (after removing stupid EARLY_CRAP_8250 select). Only strange thing I see is WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 0 at /home/tsbogend/mips/work/linux/arch/mips/mm/uasm.c:97 build_insn+0x4c4/0x570() Micro-assembler field overflow Happens twice one for build_clear_cache() and build_copy_cache(). CPU is is R4600PC 2.0. Thomas. -- Crap can work. Given enough thrust pigs will fly, but it's not necessarily a good idea. [ RFC1925, 2.3 ]