From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from ocean.emcraft.com (ocean.emcraft.com [213.221.7.182]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BE822DDF4C for ; Thu, 18 Oct 2007 23:32:47 +1000 (EST) From: Yuri Tikhonov To: Josh Boyer Subject: Re: [PATCH] ppc44x: support for 256K PAGE_SIZE Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2007 17:30:17 +0400 References: <200710181108.19413.yur@emcraft.com> <200710181718.00965.yur@emcraft.com> <20071018082514.2ce1f43b@weaponx.rchland.ibm.com> In-Reply-To: <20071018082514.2ce1f43b@weaponx.rchland.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Message-Id: <200710181730.17717.yur@emcraft.com> Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Thursday 18 October 2007 17:25, Josh Boyer wrote: > > Understood. The situation here is that the boards, which required these > > modifications, have no support in the arch/powerpc branch. So this is > > why we made this in arch/ppc. > > Bit of a dilemma then. What board exactly? These are the Katmai and Yucca PPC440SPe-based boards (from AMCC). > > > Also, I'd rather see something along the lines of hugetlbfs support instead. > > > > Here I agree with Benjamin. Furthermore, IIRC the hugetlb file-system is > > supported for PPC64 architectures only. Here we have PPC32. > > Well that needs fixing anyway, but ok. Also, is the modified binutils > only required for userspace to take advantage here? Seems so, but I'd > just like to be sure. You are right, for userspace only. > > josh > -- Yuri Tikhonov, Senior Software Engineer Emcraft Systems, www.emcraft.com