From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tony Lindgren Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] Hacks to allow booting ARM SMP kernel on UP ARMv7 Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2010 12:57:06 +0300 Message-ID: <20100819095705.GU12184@atomide.com> References: <20100817104414.19061.38999.stgit@baageli.muru.com> <20100817135205.GC20325@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <20100817141210.GJ12184@atomide.com> <20100817154035.GD20325@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <20100819073810.GR12184@atomide.com> <4C6CFBAF.6020407@canonical.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from mho-02-ewr.mailhop.org ([204.13.248.72]:51927 "EHLO mho-02-ewr.mailhop.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752041Ab0HSJ5O (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 Aug 2010 05:57:14 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4C6CFBAF.6020407@canonical.com> Sender: linux-omap-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org To: Bryan Wu Cc: Russell King - ARM Linux , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-omap@vger.kernel.org * Bryan Wu [100819 12:31]: > On 08/19/2010 03:38 PM, Tony Lindgren wrote: > > * Russell King - ARM Linux [100817 18:33]: > >> On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 05:12:11PM +0300, Tony Lindgren wrote: > >>> Great, will give it a try hopefully tomorrow. Sounds like that's the way > >>> to deal with fixing up things when booting up older UP ARMv6 without the > >>> 32v6 support :) > >> > >> What I've also been debating about is adding another word to the > >> smpalt structure, that being a set of flags which denote the situation > >> where the alternative should be used. > >> > >> That means we can use it to do individual word replacements for SMP vs > >> UP, ARMv6 vs ARMv6k etc. > > > > Sounds good to me. Maybe it should then be called cpualt instead of smpalt? > > > > Tried booting your patch and needed the following fix for Cortex-A8 UP. > > > > Now it boots to the following error: > > > > Machine configuration botched (nr -1073741824), unable to continue. > > > > Does some struct size need to be changed or something? > > > > I also tested these 2 patches on my beagle board based on -for-next branch for > linux-omap tree. I don't have debug hardware to find the kernel boot failure. It > looks like it stops at very early stage. > > Do you know where is the message (nr -1073741824) coming from? Looks like something is not quite right with smp_on_up part of __fixup_smp, returning early before smp_on_up does not produce that. Regards, Tony From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: tony@atomide.com (Tony Lindgren) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2010 12:57:06 +0300 Subject: [PATCH 0/4] Hacks to allow booting ARM SMP kernel on UP ARMv7 In-Reply-To: <4C6CFBAF.6020407@canonical.com> References: <20100817104414.19061.38999.stgit@baageli.muru.com> <20100817135205.GC20325@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <20100817141210.GJ12184@atomide.com> <20100817154035.GD20325@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <20100819073810.GR12184@atomide.com> <4C6CFBAF.6020407@canonical.com> Message-ID: <20100819095705.GU12184@atomide.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org * Bryan Wu [100819 12:31]: > On 08/19/2010 03:38 PM, Tony Lindgren wrote: > > * Russell King - ARM Linux [100817 18:33]: > >> On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 05:12:11PM +0300, Tony Lindgren wrote: > >>> Great, will give it a try hopefully tomorrow. Sounds like that's the way > >>> to deal with fixing up things when booting up older UP ARMv6 without the > >>> 32v6 support :) > >> > >> What I've also been debating about is adding another word to the > >> smpalt structure, that being a set of flags which denote the situation > >> where the alternative should be used. > >> > >> That means we can use it to do individual word replacements for SMP vs > >> UP, ARMv6 vs ARMv6k etc. > > > > Sounds good to me. Maybe it should then be called cpualt instead of smpalt? > > > > Tried booting your patch and needed the following fix for Cortex-A8 UP. > > > > Now it boots to the following error: > > > > Machine configuration botched (nr -1073741824), unable to continue. > > > > Does some struct size need to be changed or something? > > > > I also tested these 2 patches on my beagle board based on -for-next branch for > linux-omap tree. I don't have debug hardware to find the kernel boot failure. It > looks like it stops at very early stage. > > Do you know where is the message (nr -1073741824) coming from? Looks like something is not quite right with smp_on_up part of __fixup_smp, returning early before smp_on_up does not produce that. Regards, Tony