lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Mar]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [Announce] 2.6.29-rc7-rt1
Hello Tim,

On Thu, Mar 12, 2009 at 09:43:33PM +0100, Tim Sander wrote:
> So my question is, what pieces are missing on the ARM platform to get
> it working?
See the follow up mail I will write on Thomas announcement for my
current status.

> diff --git a/arch/arm/include/asm/thread_info.h b/arch/arm/include/asm/thread_info.h
> index 68b9ec8..b501541 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/include/asm/thread_info.h
> +++ b/arch/arm/include/asm/thread_info.h
> @@ -119,7 +119,8 @@ extern void iwmmxt_task_switch(struct thread_info *);
> * We use bit 30 of the preempt_count to indicate that kernel
> * preemption is occurring. See <asm/hardirq.h>.
> */
> -#define PREEMPT_ACTIVE 0x40000000
> +#define PREEMPT_ACTIVE 0x10000000
> +/*FIXME TIM #define PREEMPT_ACTIVE 0x40000000*/
I didn't need this anymore for -rc7-rt1.

> /*
> * thread information flags:
> diff --git a/arch/arm/plat-mxc/include/mach/memory.h
> b/arch/arm/plat-mxc/include/mach/memory.h
> index 0b80839..b43a536 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/plat-mxc/include/mach/memory.h
> +++ b/arch/arm/plat-mxc/include/mach/memory.h
> @@ -19,4 +19,6 @@
> #define PHYS_OFFSET UL(0x80000000)
> #endif
>
> +#define arch_is_coherent() 1
> +
I suggested a better fix already last time. Moreover I think imx isn't
coherent.

> diff --git a/include/linux/spinlock.h b/include/linux/spinlock.h
> index 6c9b9b9..130fbdd 100644
> --- a/include/linux/spinlock.h
> +++ b/include/linux/spinlock.h
> @@ -93,6 +93,7 @@
> #include <linux/bottom_half.h>
> #include <linux/irqflags.h>
> #include <linux/pickop.h>
> +#include <asm/memory.h>
Doing this in arch/arm/include/asm/bitops.h is less intrusive and it
seems to me the better place. See my patch stack.

> @@ -560,8 +561,7 @@ static inline void bit_spin_unlock(int bitnum, unsigned long *addr)
> # ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_SPINLOCK
> BUG_ON(!test_bit(bitnum, addr));
> # endif
> - //FIXME TIM clear_bit_unlock(bitnum, addr);
> - clear_bit(bitnum,addr);
> + clear_bit_unlock(bitnum, addr);
It would be easier to check your patch if it didn't contain reverts of
earlier changes.

Best regards
Uwe

--
Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-König |
Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-03-13 01:37    [from the cache]
©2003-2014 Jasper Spaans. Advertise on this site