On Sat, Nov 12, 2011 at 6:31 AM, Florian Fainelli <ffainelli@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > - considering that BMIPS4350 has a shared TLB, is it still working fine? I must > say that I have not yet tested on e.g: BCM6358 BCM6368 (which I did test) has a private TLB for each thread. I have not tested any of the shared TLB chips. It is possible that more work will be required to cover the shared TLB case. > - there a couple of places in the code where we have: > > #if defined (CONFIG_BMIPS_4350) || defined (CONFIG_BMIPS_4380) > ... do something > #elif defined(CONFIG_BMIPS_4380) > > can we turn this into a #if BMIPS43xx case .. #endif #if BMIPS5000 ... #endif > to allow a single image supporting both BMIPS43xx and BMIPS5000? Although it would be easy to check current_cpu_type() for the cases in smp-bmips.c, there are other decisions (not in this patchset) that are harder to make at runtime. One obvious case is cpu-feature-overrides.h; other cases include low-level code sequences in the exception vectors, power management standby/resume/reentry assembly code, HIGHMEM and cache configuration, memory map, etc. Side note: one of Ralf's earlier comments on this patch was a request to use pr_info() instead of printk(). This somehow fell off my TODO list. I will fix it and submit V4 later today.
