From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <4048B287.6010501@246tNt.com> Date: Fri, 05 Mar 2004 18:01:59 +0100 From: Sylvain Munaut MIME-Version: 1.0 To: LinuxPPC Subject: Re: Linux 2.6 on MPC5200. Early problems + 2.4 questions References: <40486C64.80803@246tNt.com> In-Reply-To: <40486C64.80803@246tNt.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Sender: owner-linuxppc-embedded@lists.linuxppc.org List-Id: I've got some updates on my problem. Apparently it's not blocking at the cache activation. I just thought so because apparently the 0xf000000 address is not mapped with the not-cacheable flag and so the stw I used to power up/down the led on the gpio was just waiting in the cache ... My questions currently are : - Apparently 0xf0000000 is mapped to somewhere ( the MBAR ) but I don't see where it's done ... And how do I tell it that it's IO and should not be cached. Apparently on 2.4 it works but I don't see where is the piece of code that just does that ... - The MPC5200 has 8 BAT, so shouldn't the CPU_FTR_HAS_HIGH_BATS feature flag be set in the cputable.c of the 2.4 ? And also cfr my post on the dev list about the code that clears those BAT. I thinks the wrong register is used in head.S Sylvain Munaut ** Sent via the linuxppc-embedded mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/