| To: | Ralf Baechle <ralf@uni-koblenz.de>, Robert Keller <rck@corp.home.net> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: after the kernel seems to live |
| From: | "Robert Keller" <rck@corp.home.net> |
| Date: | Wed, 02 Jun 1999 09:35:08 -0700 |
| Cc: | linux@cthulhu.engr.sgi.com |
| In-reply-to: | <19990528004632.B608@uni-koblenz.de> |
| References: | <4.1.19990527124423.00930cd0@mail> <4.1.19990526115716.03f65930@mail> <4.1.19990526115716.03f65930@mail> <19990527121840.T866@uni-koblenz.de> <4.1.19990527124423.00930cd0@mail> |
| Sender: | owner-linux@cthulhu.engr.sgi.com |
At 12:46 AM 5/28/99 +0200, Ralf Baechle wrote: >The R5000 is supported and known to work. You happen to have a >second level cache on that board? how convinced are people that the VR5000 is supported? I'm running the latest code off the linux.sgi.com cvs server and I'm getting *very* weird page faulting problems when doing the kernel/user space hazard shuffle. Its really hard to describe the problems as they are not deterministic: sometimes the right thing happens, other times I get restricted instruction exceptions... Both of these can happen on the very same kernel binary... Which of the vec0 routines should be used on the VR5K? ...robert |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Next by Date: | Re: after the kernel seems to live, William J. Earl |
|---|---|
| Next by Thread: | Re: after the kernel seems to live, William J. Earl |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |