From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from na01-bl2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-bl2lp0212.outbound.protection.outlook.com [207.46.163.212]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A61AA2C00A6 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2013 09:57:19 +1100 (EST) Message-ID: <1387234621.10013.408.camel@snotra.buserror.net> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] powerpc 8xx: Loading kernels over 8Mbytes without CONFIG_PIN_TLB From: Scott Wood To: leroy christophe Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2013 16:57:01 -0600 In-Reply-To: <52A7A58F.8090705@c-s.fr> References: <20131210112945.E4E311A2BF3@localhost.localdomain> <1386714253.10013.123.camel@snotra.buserror.net> <52A79E31.9070304@c-s.fr> <1386717537.10013.150.camel@snotra.buserror.net> <52A7A58F.8090705@c-s.fr> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, Paul Mackerras , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Wed, 2013-12-11 at 00:36 +0100, leroy christophe wrote: > Le 11/12/2013 00:18, Scott Wood a écrit : > > There wasn't previously an ifdef specifically around the setting of > > SPRN_MD_CTR. That's new. There was an ifdef around the entire block, > > which has gone away because you are now trying to map more than 8M > > regardless of CONFIG_PIN_TLB, but that has nothing to do with whether > > there should be an ifdef around SPRN_MD_CTR. > > > > > Euh, ok, but then we have to fix it in the whole function, not only in > this block. Do you think it is worth doing it ? Fix what in the whole function? I was asking what harm there would be if you just remove all the CONFIG_PIN_TLB ifdefs except around the actual RSV4I setting -- do we really care what value goes in MD_CTR for the non-pinned case, as long as it's different for each entry? -Scott