From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from gate.crashing.org (gate.crashing.org [63.228.1.57]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B7D23679E2 for ; Thu, 2 Jun 2005 15:42:26 +1000 (EST) From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt To: Nicolas DET In-Reply-To: <20050602053107.111887000086@mwinf0701.wanadoo.fr> References: <20050602053107.111887000086@mwinf0701.wanadoo.fr> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Thu, 02 Jun 2005 15:41:49 +1000 Message-Id: <1117690909.31082.43.camel@gaston> Mime-Version: 1.0 Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org Subject: Re: Tiny patch for arch/ppc/kernel/cputable.c to properly support the IBM PowerPC 750CXe rev 3.1 List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Thu, 2005-06-02 at 07:29 +0100, Nicolas DET wrote: > Hello Benjamin, > > On 01/06/2005, you wrote: > > On Wed, 2005-06-01 at 19:14 +0100, Nicolas DET wrote: > >> Hello, > >> > >> You can find enclosed a small patch to properly support the 750 CXe rev > >> 3.1. Indeed, the current kernel (2.6.11.11) only supports rev 2.1 and > >> ignores 3.1 > >> > >> It's a tiny patch: it only add an entry in the table with the correct > >> PVR and name. Others values has been copied from 750CXe rev 2.1. > >> > >> I succesfully patched & compiled a vanila 2.6.11.11 from kernel.org. > > > Is it needed ? I have it in my local tree and never actuall remembered > > to actually send it :) In general, that kind of entries are really only > > needed when there is a feature change... > > .cpu_features is exactly the same compare to 745/755 (750CXe 3.1, PVR 0008 > 3311, was probed as 745/755). However, there is a small difference: It now > calls __setup_cpu_750cx instead of __setup_cpu_750. > This end up calling setup_750cx which looks like to disable NAP. Ah, yes, for some PLL configurations... if the CXe is not affected by this bug, it should probably avoid that "fixup" then... > Well, I did not notice anything before and after the patch. It's more > 'comsetic': cpuinfo shows the correct cpu name. :-) > > Regards