From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list linux-mips); Mon, 11 Oct 2004 01:47:36 +0100 (BST) Received: from adsl-68-124-224-226.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net ([IPv6:::ffff:68.124.224.226]:19469 "EHLO goobz.com") by linux-mips.org with ESMTP id ; Mon, 11 Oct 2004 01:47:32 +0100 Received: from [10.2.2.70] (adsl-63-194-214-47.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net [63.194.214.47]) by goobz.com (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id i9B0lSu18986; Sun, 10 Oct 2004 17:47:29 -0700 Message-ID: <4169D818.5020802@embeddedalley.com> Date: Sun, 10 Oct 2004 17:47:20 -0700 From: Pete Popov User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.7.3 (X11/20040803) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Maciej W. Rozycki" CC: Ralf Baechle , "linux-mips@linux-mips.org" Subject: Re: PATCH References: <1097452888.4627.25.camel@localhost.localdomain> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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: 6008 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: ppopov@embeddedalley.com Precedence: bulk X-list: linux-mips Maciej W. Rozycki wrote: > On Mon, 10 Oct 2004, Pete Popov wrote: > > >>diff -u -r1.13 addrspace.h >>--- include/asm-mips/addrspace.h 30 Nov 2003 01:52:25 -0000 1.13 >>+++ include/asm-mips/addrspace.h 19 Sep 2004 22:51:28 -0000 >>@@ -80,7 +80,11 @@ >> #define XKSSEG 0x4000000000000000 >> #define XKPHYS 0x8000000000000000 >> #define XKSEG 0xc000000000000000 >>+#if defined(CONFIG_64BIT_PHYS_ADDR) && defined(CONFIG_CPU_MIPS32) >>+#define CKSEG0 0x80000000 >>+#else >> #define CKSEG0 0xffffffff80000000 >>+#endif >> #define CKSEG1 0xffffffffa0000000 >> #define CKSSEG 0xffffffffc0000000 >> #define CKSEG3 0xffffffffe0000000 > > > This looks suspicious, please explain. Clearly a buglet, carried over from 2.4. That section of the code wouldn't even be compiled, since CONFIG_MIPS64 is not defined. I'll remove that and send a new patch. Anything else you see that's suspicious :)? Pete