[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Icache coherency problems for R3400, DS5000/240

To: "Gleb O. Raiko" <>
Subject: Re: Icache coherency problems for R3400, DS5000/240
From: "Maciej W. Rozycki" <>
Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2000 12:37:48 +0200 (MET DST)
In-reply-to: <>
Organization: Technical University of Gdansk
On Mon, 19 Jun 2000, Gleb O. Raiko wrote:

> Why did you change name of bits in CP0 regs ? It seems it's possible to

 Because they serve a different functionality for R[23]K (ISolate Cache
and SWap Cache).  Current names reflect R4K+ and are confusing in R[23]K
code.  Note that R4K+ names are left intact, so this should not be a
problem for non R[23]K CPUs.

> get the patch functionality w/o such a change. Morover, the changes in
> the icache line size assumption
> are already there, in 2.3. What is a version of linux you patch is
> against ?

 The CVS tree from  As of Jun 19, 4:25 UTC I can't see it
there.  It claims to be version 2.4.0-test1.  Isn't that current?

+  Maciej W. Rozycki, Technical University of Gdansk, Poland   +
+        e-mail:, PGP key available        +

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