| To: | "Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@linux-mips.org> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [patch 1/5] SiByte fixes for 2.6.12 |
| From: | Ralf Baechle <ralf@linux-mips.org> |
| Date: | Sat, 1 Oct 2005 10:28:07 +0100 |
| Cc: | Andrew Isaacson <adi@broadcom.com>, linux-mips@linux-mips.org |
| In-reply-to: | <Pine.LNX.4.61L.0506231153080.17155@blysk.ds.pg.gda.pl> |
| Original-recipient: | rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org |
| References: | <20050622230042.GA17919@broadcom.com> <Pine.LNX.4.61L.0506231153080.17155@blysk.ds.pg.gda.pl> |
| Sender: | linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org |
| User-agent: | Mutt/1.4.2.1i |
On Thu, Jun 23, 2005 at 12:01:57PM +0100, Maciej W. Rozycki wrote: > Well, the flag is not really to specify whether the common code is to be > used or not. It's about whether the TLB is like that of the R4k. > Actually it's always been a mystery for me why the common code cannot be > used for the SB1, but perhaps there is something specific that I could > only discover in that "SB-1 Core User Manual" that I yet have to see, > sigh... > > Of course if your TLB is indeed different from that of the R4k, then you > shouldn't be setting cp0.config.mt to 1 in the first place... The reason was primarily the tiny bit of extra performance because the SB1 doesn't need the hazard handling overhead. Also tlb-sb1 has a few changes that are needed to initialize a TLB in undefined state after powerup. That was needed to run Linux on firmware-less SB1 cores. Ralf |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: [patch 1/5] SiByte fixes for 2.6.12, Ralf Baechle |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [patch 4/5] SiByte fixes for 2.6.12, Ralf Baechle |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [patch 1/5] SiByte fixes for 2.6.12, Ralf Baechle |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [patch 1/5] SiByte fixes for 2.6.12, Maciej W. Rozycki |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |