No, I think we need more experiments to test the compatiability of Loongson-3. So, ralf, I suggest to merge the first patch and drop this one. On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 8:33 PM, cee1 <fykcee1@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > 2014-05-20 1:06 GMT+08:00 Ralf Baechle <ralf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>: >> On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 11:15:15PM +0800, Chen Jie wrote: >> >>> 2014-05-19 18:02 GMT+08:00 Paul Burton <paul.burton@xxxxxxxxxx>: >>> > On Sun, May 18, 2014 at 10:39:20PM +0800, Huacai Chen wrote: >>> >> Due to Wang Rui's tests, Loongson-3's EI/DI instructions don't have >>> >> correct behaviors, its Status.FR is also different with MIPS64R2. So, >>> >> I don't want to select CPU_MIPS64_R2. >>> > >>> > Out of curiosity, how do ei & di misbehave? >>> In our test, it may cause machine stall if use ei&di in kernel, >>> especially in smp case. >> >> In that case we could make the use of DI/EI depend on a new errata flag >> in war.h or similar. > > Thanks for the suggest! > Huacai，I think we would try to select MIPS64_R2 for loongson3 > processor, and take care of the above bits to see whether it works. > > > -- > Regards, > > - cee1
