linux-mips
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH -queue v0 4/6] [loongson] add basic fuloong2f support

To: Ralf Baechle <ralf@linux-mips.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -queue v0 4/6] [loongson] add basic fuloong2f support
From: Wu Zhangjin <wuzhangjin@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 06 Nov 2009 18:05:59 +0800
Cc: linux-mips@linux-mips.org, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, huhb@lemote.com, yanh@lemote.com, Zhang Le <r0bertz@gentoo.org>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, Nicholas Mc Guire <der.herr@hofr.at>, zhangfx@lemote.com, liujl@lemote.com
Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:subject:from:reply-to:to:cc :in-reply-to:references:content-type:organization:date:message-id :mime-version:x-mailer:content-transfer-encoding; bh=Oh5P0bl7b1wMO+JvV6GC1dL0R3NGWWphhs3nCYJHBCc=; b=rmgq678u8I9xflj5keV5aRHNxzIKjXEIRF6F2bpMqcfmk+Iofsazio+ajvEFiGTeft UnTlqeO48RwR/z9WgYquaP2Q0hJSt5Wm9BNSvTzPlBIUO9VvRH9WKxBT/6XeXgn4vWlu j77hW9dUtrWw0VDYhETN/+5SBrDTCDFOAdIi4=
Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=subject:from:reply-to:to:cc:in-reply-to:references:content-type :organization:date:message-id:mime-version:x-mailer :content-transfer-encoding; b=xfV/sDxlZ/ReG1Hk98JXSFPYSKZFU/USVXPgSV3zt0HvAKz9kFUBiud/vwcFduGsy5 SIhwr2AuwkO1nPV812qalHyhxfqkxsvdEETY+YIzeie4C2n0OZiOG96DY0nbPz7TmHjk lc51S9qa/dCdmoGWr8lWFoNdmSAATTE8ClahA=
In-reply-to: <20091106083042.GA17723@linux-mips.org>
Organization: DSLab, Lanzhou University, China
Original-recipient: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org
References: <cover.1257325319.git.wuzhangjin@gmail.com> <0f805f7d12c5a7cbcc125ba4a1b70113ec2047a6.1257325319.git.wuzhangjin@gmail.com> <20091105131603.GA18232@linux-mips.org> <1257485984.2299.21.camel@falcon.domain.org> <20091106083042.GA17723@linux-mips.org>
Reply-to: wuzhangjin@gmail.com
Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org
Hi, Ralf

I will split the coming patchset as three parts?

1. fixes of old support
2. loongson2f support
3. lemote 2f family machines support

is this okay?

Regards,
        Wu Zhangjin

On Fri, 2009-11-06 at 09:30 +0100, Ralf Baechle wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 06, 2009 at 01:39:44PM +0800, Wu Zhangjin wrote:
> 
> > > > +       if ((LOONGSON_INTISR & LOONGSON_INTEN) & LOONGSON_INT_BIT_INT0) 
> > > > {
> > > > +               imr = inb(0x21) | (inb(0xa1) << 8);
> > > > +               isr = inb(0x20) | (inb(0xa0) << 8);
> > > > +               isr &= ~0x4;    /* irq2 for cascade */
> > > > +               isr &= ~imr;
> > > > +               irq = ffs(isr) - 1;
> > > > +       }
> > > 
> > > Any reason why you're not using i8259_irq() from <asm/i8259.h> here?
> > > That function not only gets the locking right, it also minimizes the 
> > > number
> > > of accesses to the i8259 - which even on modern silicon can be stuningly
> > > slow.
> 
> > Just asked Yanhua, He told me there is a bug in cs5536, if using the
> > i8259_irq() directly, we can not get the irq. and just tried it, the
> > kernel hang on booting.
> 
> Wonderful.  Even 30 years after it was built there are still new i8259
> bugs :-)
> 
> This is probably worth a comment in the code.
> 
>   Ralf



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