From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from e8.ny.us.ibm.com (e8.ny.us.ibm.com [32.97.182.138]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "e8.ny.us.ibm.com", Issuer "Equifax" (verified OK)) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C8BA4B7112 for ; Thu, 3 Feb 2011 10:54:05 +1100 (EST) Received: from d01dlp02.pok.ibm.com (d01dlp02.pok.ibm.com [9.56.224.85]) by e8.ny.us.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.13.1) with ESMTP id p12JZrrB024146 for ; Wed, 2 Feb 2011 14:36:08 -0500 Received: from d01relay06.pok.ibm.com (d01relay06.pok.ibm.com [9.56.227.116]) by d01dlp02.pok.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7125B4DE8026 for ; Wed, 2 Feb 2011 18:53:25 -0500 (EST) Received: from d01av03.pok.ibm.com (d01av03.pok.ibm.com [9.56.224.217]) by d01relay06.pok.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id p12Ns0F72171042 for ; Wed, 2 Feb 2011 18:54:00 -0500 Received: from d01av03.pok.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d01av03.pok.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.13.1/NCO v10.0 AVout) with ESMTP id p12Ns00s026323 for ; Wed, 2 Feb 2011 21:54:00 -0200 Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 4/6] powerpc/44x: don't use tlbivax on AMP systems From: Dave Kleikamp To: David Gibson In-Reply-To: <20110202230844.GG3032@yookeroo> References: <1296586126-32765-1-git-send-email-shaggy@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <1296586126-32765-5-git-send-email-shaggy@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20110202230844.GG3032@yookeroo> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Date: Wed, 02 Feb 2011 17:53:59 -0600 Message-ID: <1296690839.12290.108.camel@shaggy-w500> Mime-Version: 1.0 Cc: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Thu, 2011-02-03 at 10:08 +1100, David Gibson wrote: > On Tue, Feb 01, 2011 at 12:48:44PM -0600, Dave Kleikamp wrote: > > Since other OS's may be running on the other cores don't use tlbivax > > [snip] > > +#ifdef CONFIG_44x > > +void __init early_init_mmu_44x(void) > > +{ > > + unsigned long root = of_get_flat_dt_root(); > > + if (of_flat_dt_is_compatible(root, "ibm,47x-AMP")) > > + amp = 1; > > +} > > +#endif /* CONFIG_44x */ > > A test against a hardcoded compatible string seems a nasty way to do > this. Maybe we should define a new boolean property for the root > node. I'm not crazy about this string, but I needed something in the device tree to key off of. Freescale has something similar (i.e. MPC8572DS-CAMP), so I chose to follow their example. I'd be happy to replace it with a boolean property. Any objection to just using "amp"? Thanks, Shaggy -- Dave Kleikamp IBM Linux Technology Center