From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list linux-mips); Wed, 23 May 2007 09:37:58 +0100 (BST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1]:9703 "EHLO dl5rb.ham-radio-op.net") by ftp.linux-mips.org with ESMTP id S20021513AbXEWIh4 (ORCPT ); Wed, 23 May 2007 09:37:56 +0100 Received: from denk.linux-mips.net (denk.linux-mips.net [127.0.0.1]) by dl5rb.ham-radio-op.net (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l4N8bhJ4004962; Wed, 23 May 2007 09:37:43 +0100 Received: (from ralf@localhost) by denk.linux-mips.net (8.13.8/8.13.8/Submit) id l4N8bgBb004961; Wed, 23 May 2007 09:37:42 +0100 Date: Wed, 23 May 2007 09:37:42 +0100 From: Ralf Baechle To: Kumba Cc: Martin Michlmayr , linux-mips@linux-mips.org, Giuseppe Sacco Subject: Re: SGI O2 meth: missing sysfs device symlink Message-ID: <20070523083742.GA4495@linux-mips.org> References: <1178743456.15447.41.camel@scarafaggio> <20070516151939.GH19816@deprecation.cyrius.com> <20070516160313.GA3409@bongo.bofh.it> <50621.192.168.2.50.1179383217.squirrel@eppesuigoccas.homedns.org> <20070517151636.GJ3586@deprecation.cyrius.com> <20070521154726.GE5943@linux-mips.org> <20070522110956.GB29118@linux-mips.org> <4653BA42.3060104@gentoo.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4653BA42.3060104@gentoo.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.2i 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: 15140 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: ralf@linux-mips.org Precedence: bulk X-list: linux-mips On Tue, May 22, 2007 at 11:51:30PM -0400, Kumba wrote: > Didn't test on 2.6.22 (yet), but 2.6.21.1 works: That's the only one I care about for purposes of upstream patch submission anyway. > Btw, If we wanted to protect meth from the speculative execution issues of > the R10000 processor, what's the right way for that? I believe IP28 used a > special type of buffer for protecting Seeq from the DMA wonkiness that > occurs, but I got the indication that Meth would need a different approach. I don't see why the standard approach would fail for meth. Ralf