linux-mips
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH] Add support for 4KS cpu.

To: "Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@linux-mips.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add support for 4KS cpu.
From: Franck <vagabon.xyz@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2005 17:10:52 +0200
Cc: Ralf Baechle <ralf@linux-mips.org>, linux-mips@linux-mips.org
Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=azPCltp/P86HLYt955oXYKpYS2gMtU3tF3sn5UsK/rB0kubopNBGCI090+g1X89ADFw5/OjED87zcx+8nv1wHCu7xJtqw2+JTaT6noTT2zXjXi43bLtZnBOvCFEly0B/lnjnuF97Qm6tt2GufutVReg2WxtTRQradnkVYk91Z00=
In-reply-to: <Pine.LNX.4.61L.0510041430120.10696@blysk.ds.pg.gda.pl>
Original-recipient: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org
References: <cda58cb80510040149p690397afo@mail.gmail.com> <Pine.LNX.4.61L.0510041219500.10696@blysk.ds.pg.gda.pl> <cda58cb80510040610k1a7f430fn@mail.gmail.com> <Pine.LNX.4.61L.0510041430120.10696@blysk.ds.pg.gda.pl>
Reply-to: Franck <vagabon.xyz@gmail.com>
Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org
2005/10/4, Maciej W. Rozycki <macro@linux-mips.org>:
>  See my other comment in this thread.  As to the SmartMIPS/crypto
> instructions -- unless they are going to be emitted by GCC for the kernel
> build (which I seriously doubt), there is no point in enabling them.
>

some assembly code could...

> > algorithms. And have some extra bits in TLB to protect pages from
> > being execute for example. These are the main differences that I can
>
>  Now that may be of potential interest of the kernel, but again, that's in
> principle probably not specific to these processors,
>

hmm, I'm not an expert in MIPS cpu as you guys, so can you give me an
example of others processors that have such TLB features ?

> > remember. Big fat warning: I sent all support I have done for these
> > cpu, _not_ more, _not_ less. I agree it's almost nothing but it's a
> > start...
>
>  Well, it's probably a bit too early for inclusion, but it's certainly not
> for a review.  By sending changes here for discussion early you may avoid
> a lot of hassle later when you may discover a major update is required for
> them to be accepted.  Good luck!

Actually Ralf asked for it in a previous thread.

Thanks
--
               Franck

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>