Re: another 4kc machine check.

[Greg Weeks <greg.weeks@timesys.com>]

Kevin D. Kissell wrote:

>If the 4KC and 4KEC need it, so does the 4KSC (and 4KSD).
>
>  
>
Is this a reasonable thing to do though. I always hate making changes 
that work, but that I don't understand why.

Greg Weeks

>----- Original Message ----- 
>From: "Greg Weeks" <greg.weeks@timesys.com>
>To: "Ralf Baechle" <ralf@linux-mips.org>
>Cc: <linux-mips@linux-mips.org>
>Sent: Monday, April 11, 2005 21:47
>Subject: Re: another 4kc machine check.
>
>
>  
>
>>This patch appears to fix my machine check problem on the 4kc. The 4kc 
>>shouldn't need an ssnop here, but this appears to fix it.
>>
>>Greg Weeks
>>
>>    
>>
>
>
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>  
>
>>--- mips-malta4kcle-basic/arch/mips/mm/tlbex.c-orig
>>+++ mips-malta4kcle-basic/arch/mips/mm/tlbex.c
>>@@ -847,7 +847,6 @@
>> 
>>  case CPU_R10000:
>>  case CPU_R12000:
>>- case CPU_4KC:
>>  case CPU_SB1:
>>  case CPU_4KSC:
>>  case CPU_20KC:
>>@@ -874,6 +873,7 @@
>>  tlbw(p);
>>  break;
>> 
>>+ case CPU_4KC:
>>  case CPU_4KEC:
>>  case CPU_24K:
>>  i_ehb(p);
>>
>>    
>>