From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-in-11.arcor-online.net (mail-in-11.arcor-online.net [151.189.21.51]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "mx.arcor.de", Issuer "Thawte Premium Server CA" (verified OK)) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D5D37DDF8A for ; Wed, 25 Apr 2007 23:07:42 +1000 (EST) In-Reply-To: <20070424.212736.115930755.davem@davemloft.net> References: <1177459397.14873.160.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20070424.212736.115930755.davem@davemloft.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v623) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Message-Id: From: Segher Boessenkool Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/6] Start split out of common open firmware code Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2007 15:07:34 +0200 To: David Miller Cc: sfr@canb.auug.org.au, paulus@samba.org, linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , >> The SPARC tree carries the same broken code -- is >> this just a case of code copying, or are there >> actual SPARC machines with such broken trees? > > There have been many cases of missed or even erroneous > properties on sparc tree, but I am not too sure about > the cell counting cases. > > Let's do this, once the consolidation is done keeping > behavior as-is, give me a patch to review that changing > the cell counting bits and I'll verify it against > all the machines I have here plus some OFW tree dumps. Okay, good plan. Let's try this as soon as the current patch series hits the powerpc tree. Segher