From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Keith Owens <kaos@sgi.com>
Date: Fri, 04 Jul 2003 01:26:37 +0000
Subject: Re: Reliably creating MCA on white box Itanium-1
Message-Id: <marc-linux-ia64-105728237728073@msgid-missing>
List-Id: <linux-ia64.vger.kernel.org>
References: <marc-linux-ia64-105721395828393@msgid-missing>
In-Reply-To: <marc-linux-ia64-105721395828393@msgid-missing>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org

On Thu, 3 Jul 2003 08:27:36 -0500 (CDT), 
Jack Steiner <steiner@sgi.com> wrote:
>> 
>> Is there a way of reliably creating an MCA on a white box Itanium 1?
>> B3 processors, firmware is B117A.  Failing that, what about creating an
>> MCA on a white box Itanium-2?
>> 
>> Loading a duplicate ITC is no good, I need an MCA that actually enters
>> ia64_mca_ucmc_handler in mca.c.  A working example using
>> PAL_CACHE_WRITE would be nice.
>
>
>Why doesnt loading a duplicate TR (not TC) work for you?  I've used that
>method and found it to be reliable. 

Because mca_asm.S does not call the C code for TLB errors.  I want to
test the C code on standard hardware.