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 71D46DDDFF for ; Mon, 15 Oct 2007 07:18:48 +1000 (EST) Subject: Re: [PATCH] Quieten cache information at boot From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt To: Olof Johansson In-Reply-To: <20071014201431.GA23002@lixom.net> References: <20071014193317.GC26693@kryten> <20071014201431.GA23002@lixom.net> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2007 07:18:34 +1000 Message-Id: <1192396714.6188.8.camel@pasglop> Mime-Version: 1.0 Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, paulus@samba.org, Anton Blanchard Reply-To: benh@kernel.crashing.org List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Sun, 2007-10-14 at 15:14 -0500, Olof Johansson wrote: > On Sun, Oct 14, 2007 at 02:33:17PM -0500, Anton Blanchard wrote: > > > > After 6 years the ppc64 kernel still thinks its important to tell me my > > cache line size is 0x80 bytes. I think most people who care know that by > > now. The rest probably cant even understand the hex output. > > > > Since we might have misconfigured firmware or cpus that have a linesize > > that isnt 128 bytes, I still print it out for those cases. If people > > would prefer to remove it completely, lets do it. > > Let's just remove it completely. I have yet to see a bug because of it, > and we have 0x40 byte cache lines. I did have issues because of incorrect cache line sizes recently... this printk was actually useful for me :-) Ben.