From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from de01egw02.freescale.net (de01egw02.freescale.net [192.88.165.103]) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2010E67A30 for ; Thu, 3 Feb 2005 16:55:46 +1100 (EST) In-Reply-To: <1107407613.2363.9.camel@gaston> References: <1107407613.2363.9.camel@gaston> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v619) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Message-Id: <3C2E1EF2-75A8-11D9-9151-000393DBC2E8@freescale.com> From: Kumar Gala Date: Wed, 2 Feb 2005 23:55:40 -0600 To: "Benjamin Herrenschmidt" Cc: linuxppc-dev list , Chris Friesen Subject: Re: new binutils breaks "tlbie" instruction in kernel? List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Someone should just add some of our asm files into the ppc binutils=20 testsuite, why we cant seem to get a stability on this seems beyond me=20= :) Well, something else to add to the ppc kernel janitors list. - kumar On Feb 2, 2005, at 11:13 PM, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > On Wed, 2005-02-02 at 12:39 -0600, Chris Friesen wrote: > > The "tlbie" instruction has a bit which may be set to indicate=20 > regular > > or large page size.=A0 This used to be set via an optional second=20 > parameter. > > > > Apparently some time between binutils versions 2.15.91.0.2 and > > 2.15.92.0.2 a change went in to make this second parameter = mandatory, > > which breaks the kernel ppc code. > > > > What is the recommended way to fix this?=A0 Do all binutils versions > > understand the second parameter, or will "sufficiently old" versions > > choke on it? > > Wasn't it fixed ? > > Ben. > > > > _______________________________________________ > Linuxppc-dev mailing list > Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org > https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev