From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from ozlabs.org (ozlabs.org [203.10.76.45]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "mx.ozlabs.org", Issuer "CA Cert Signing Authority" (verified OK)) by bilbo.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E878DB7334 for ; Fri, 24 Jul 2009 00:42:48 +1000 (EST) Received: from gate.crashing.org (gate.crashing.org [63.228.1.57]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 16942DDD1C for ; Fri, 24 Jul 2009 00:42:47 +1000 (EST) Message-Id: <94483336-7714-4713-AB1C-2AAAA9BBB638@kernel.crashing.org> From: Kumar Gala To: Benjamin Herrenschmidt In-Reply-To: <1248328938.3367.46.camel@pasglop> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v935.3) Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/20] powerpc: base 64-bit Book3E processor support Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2009 09:42:41 -0500 References: <1248328938.3367.46.camel@pasglop> Cc: linuxppc-dev list List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Jul 23, 2009, at 1:02 AM, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > Here is a series of patches that implement some basic support > for 64-bit Book3E processors that comply to architecture 2.06. > > There is no specific processor announced yet. The patches make > some shortcut which means they currently rely on an implementation > that supports MMU v2 with support for the "HES" feature (HW entry > select) and with support for the "TLB reservation" feature. They > also assume a single unified TLB array. I shouldn't be very hard > to implement support for other variants of the architecture on > top of this though. > > The current set of patch has no proper support yet for hugetlb, > nor for "special" interrupt levels (debug, critical and machine > check). Some minimal support for debug/critical levels is provided > specifically for the "Debug" interrupt (single step etc...) only > when it occurs from within user space code. > > The intend is to merge these in 2.6.32. They rely on pretty much > all the other patches I've been posting lately including the > generic changes to add the virtual address argument to pte_free_tlb. > Are these in a git tree/branch. Makes it a bit easier to test out on FSL booke-32 to make sure we didn't break anything. - k