From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from ch1outboundpool.messaging.microsoft.com (ch1ehsobe006.messaging.microsoft.com [216.32.181.186]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "mail.global.frontbridge.com", Issuer "Microsoft Secure Server Authority" (verified OK)) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C2B81B6FA5 for ; Fri, 14 Oct 2011 02:35:18 +1100 (EST) Message-ID: <4E970528.8080908@freescale.com> Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2011 10:35:04 -0500 From: Timur Tabi MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Kumar Gala Subject: Re: [PATCH] powerpc/85xx: fix PHYS_64BIT selection for P1022DS References: <1316806370-21067-1-git-send-email-agust@denx.de> <6EFB6D12-7505-4D3E-8FF9-033EF74FFB81@kernel.crashing.org> <6F5815DD-DBF0-4155-94CE-FEDC2C9802E1@kernel.crashing.org> In-Reply-To: <6F5815DD-DBF0-4155-94CE-FEDC2C9802E1@kernel.crashing.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Cc: Anatolij Gustschin , "linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org" List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Kumar Gala wrote: >> > Why did you apply this patch? Both Scott and I rejected it. > Because its fixing a real issue. If we want to remove PHYS_64BIT support or make it optional for the board feel free to send another patch. Ok, so if someone posts a patch that works but does things the wrong way, and that patch gets rejected during reviews, but the submitter doesn't post a follow-up patch that does things the right way, you're going to apply the first patch anyway? What about the BSP team's contention that enabling 64-bit support in the kernel can drop performance by up to 25% in some situations? We talked about that on an internal mailing list several months ago. -- Timur Tabi Linux kernel developer at Freescale