linux-mips
[Top] [All Lists]
<prev [Date] next>
[Advanced]
 <prev [Thread] next>

Re: [PATCH] Add MIPS64R2 core support.

from [Leonid Yegoshin] [Permanent Link][Original]
To: Sergei Shtylyov <sshtylyov@mvista.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add MIPS64R2 core support.
From: Leonid Yegoshin <yegoshin@mips.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2012 12:55:03 -0700
Cc: "Steven J. Hill" <sjhill@mips.com>, <linux-mips@linux-mips.org>, <ralf@linux-mips.org>
In-reply-to: <4F848957.6000400@mvista.com>
References: <1333987461-822-1-git-send-email-sjhill@mips.com> <4F841E48.7000104@mvista.com> <4F848576.6040204@mips.com> <4F848957.6000400@mvista.com>
Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.18) Gecko/20110617 Thunderbird/3.1.11 
On 04/10/2012 12:26 PM, Sergei Shtylyov wrote:

Hello.

Leonid Yegoshin wrote:


+config 64BIT_PHYS_ADDR
+    bool "Kernel supports 64 bit physical addresses" if EXPERIMENTAL
+    depends on 64BIT
This option is selected on 32-bit CPUs like Alchemy, which has 36-bit physical address. It will cause a warning about unmet 


Just verified - selected Alchemy and DB1000 board and got



# CONFIG_64BIT is not set
CONFIG_64BIT_PHYS_ADDR=y
CONFIG_ARCH_PHYS_ADDR_T_64BIT=y
CONFIG_PHYS_ADDR_T_64BIT=y



???
And you didn't get a warning on "select 64BIT_PHYS_ADDR"? Strange, modern Kconfig should spit out one...
OK, you right, I missed it in bunch of another. It has sense to add a missed dependency. 


- Leonid.
[More with this subject...]
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Previous by Date:  Re: [PATCH] Add MIPS64R2 core support., Sergei Shtylyov
Next by Date:  Re: [PATCH] irq/irq_domain: Quit ignoring error returns from irq_alloc_desc_from()., Grant Likely
Previous by Thread:  Re: [PATCH] Add MIPS64R2 core support., Sergei Shtylyov
Next by Thread:  Re: [PATCH] Add MIPS64R2 core support., Sergei Shtylyov
Indexes:  [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists]