Re: another 4kc machine check.

[Greg Weeks <greg.weeks@timesys.com>]

Kevin D. Kissell wrote:

> If the 4KC and 4KEC need it, so does the 4KSC (and 4KSD).
>
>  
Is this a reasonable thing to do though. I always hate making changes 
that work, but that I don't understand why.
Greg Weeks

> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Greg Weeks" <greg.weeks@timesys.com>
> To: "Ralf Baechle" <ralf@linux-mips.org>
> Cc: <linux-mips@linux-mips.org>
> Sent: Monday, April 11, 2005 21:47
> Subject: Re: another 4kc machine check.
>
>
>  
>
> > This patch appears to fix my machine check problem on the 4kc. The 4kc 
> > shouldn't need an ssnop here, but this appears to fix it.
> > Greg Weeks
> >
> >    
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>  
>
> > --- mips-malta4kcle-basic/arch/mips/mm/tlbex.c-orig
> > +++ mips-malta4kcle-basic/arch/mips/mm/tlbex.c
> > @@ -847,7 +847,6 @@
> >
> >  case CPU_R10000:
> >  case CPU_R12000:
> > - case CPU_4KC:
> >  case CPU_SB1:
> >  case CPU_4KSC:
> >  case CPU_20KC:
> > @@ -874,6 +873,7 @@
> >  tlbw(p);
> >  break;
> >
> > + case CPU_4KC:
> >  case CPU_4KEC:
> >  case CPU_24K:
> >  i_ehb(p);
> >
> >