From: Gabriel Paubert <paubert@iram.es>
To: Segher Boessenkool <segher@kernel.crashing.org>
Cc: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>,
linas@austin.ibm.com, valvoline <valvoline@vrlteam.org>,
linuxppc-dev list <linuxppc-dev@lists.linuxppc.org>
Subject: Re: Broadcom BCM94306
Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2004 18:27:25 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20040121172725.GB3814@iram.es> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <A3C1C69E-4B72-11D8-BDF1-000A95A4DC02@kernel.crashing.org>
On Tue, Jan 20, 2004 at 07:01:15PM +0100, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
>
> On 19-jan-04, at 23:05, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
>
> >
> >>The BAT thing at least is documented (and has been documented
> >>_for ever_ -- see the PEM, the 970 is a 64-bit chip. Get the
> >>rev 2.0 PEM from the 970 doc page).
> >>
> >>The large page thing is cpu specific afaik (from memory).
> >
> >POWER3 had BATs
>
> Sure, but BATs are not *required* by the 64-bit architecture.
>
>
> Segher
>
>
> p.s. Well actually, I went to check -- and the PEM 2.0 _does_
> define BATs for 64-bit. Let's put this under "POWER4 and
> derivatives specific" as well then, until the docs get fixed :-)
Indeed, sorry for the late reply, but I was really wondering how you
could interpret a bit level description of the BATs and the sentences
describing them as "some implementations may not have them" ;-)
There are no mention of big/large/huge pages either[1], nor of
instructions which may have been added for Power4/970 (I know
about mfcrf)
Frankly speaking the current state of the documentation is worrying me,
I remember that when the PPC750 was announced, a lot of documentation
was added to IBM and Motorola websites in a matter of days.
Regards,
Gabriel
[1] well, I found some mentions of the large pages in a redbook about
Power4. But that's about all.
** Sent via the linuxppc-dev mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-01-21 17:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-01-14 16:11 Broadcom BCM94306 valvoline
2004-01-15 0:13 ` linas
2004-01-15 9:30 ` Segher Boessenkool
2004-01-15 11:50 ` Gabriel Paubert
2004-01-15 13:00 ` Segher Boessenkool
2004-01-15 13:12 ` Sven Luther
2004-01-15 13:18 ` Segher Boessenkool
2004-01-16 19:54 ` Gabriel Paubert
2004-01-16 23:19 ` linas
2004-01-17 3:25 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2004-01-17 18:21 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2004-01-19 14:11 ` Segher Boessenkool
2004-01-19 22:05 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2004-01-20 18:01 ` Segher Boessenkool
2004-01-21 17:27 ` Gabriel Paubert [this message]
2004-01-15 13:39 ` Colin Leroy
2004-01-16 22:09 ` Gabriel Paubert
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20040121172725.GB3814@iram.es \
--to=paubert@iram.es \
--cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=linas@austin.ibm.com \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.linuxppc.org \
--cc=segher@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=valvoline@vrlteam.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).