From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: bryan.wu@canonical.com (Bryan Wu) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2010 17:38:55 +0800 Subject: [PATCH 0/4] Hacks to allow booting ARM SMP kernel on UP ARMv7 In-Reply-To: <20100819073810.GR12184@atomide.com> References: <20100817104414.19061.38999.stgit@baageli.muru.com> <20100817135205.GC20325@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <20100817141210.GJ12184@atomide.com> <20100817154035.GD20325@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <20100819073810.GR12184@atomide.com> Message-ID: <4C6CFBAF.6020407@canonical.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 08/19/2010 03:38 PM, Tony Lindgren wrote: > * Russell King - ARM Linux [100817 18:33]: >> On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 05:12:11PM +0300, Tony Lindgren wrote: >>> Great, will give it a try hopefully tomorrow. Sounds like that's the way >>> to deal with fixing up things when booting up older UP ARMv6 without the >>> 32v6 support :) >> >> What I've also been debating about is adding another word to the >> smpalt structure, that being a set of flags which denote the situation >> where the alternative should be used. >> >> That means we can use it to do individual word replacements for SMP vs >> UP, ARMv6 vs ARMv6k etc. > > Sounds good to me. Maybe it should then be called cpualt instead of smpalt? > > Tried booting your patch and needed the following fix for Cortex-A8 UP. > > Now it boots to the following error: > > Machine configuration botched (nr -1073741824), unable to continue. > > Does some struct size need to be changed or something? > I also tested these 2 patches on my beagle board based on -for-next branch for linux-omap tree. I don't have debug hardware to find the kernel boot failure. It looks like it stops at very early stage. Do you know where is the message (nr -1073741824) coming from? Thanks, -- Bryan Wu Kernel Developer +86.138-1617-6545 Mobile Ubuntu Kernel Team | Hardware Enablement Team Canonical Ltd. www.canonical.com Ubuntu - Linux for human beings | www.ubuntu.com