[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <27B762B9-ABD9-495A-B9A6-74541FEB8F2F@flygoat.com>
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 2020 04:48:21 +0800
From: Jiaxun Yang <jiaxun.yang@...goat.com>
To: "Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@...ux-mips.org>
CC: YunQiang Su <wzssyqa@...il.com>,
Tiezhu Yang <yangtiezhu@...ngson.cn>,
Thomas Bogendoerfer <tsbogend@...ha.franken.de>,
linux-mips <linux-mips@...r.kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Xuefeng Li <lixuefeng@...ngson.cn>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] MIPS: Limit check_bugs32() under CONFIG_32BIT
于 2020年4月10日 GMT+08:00 上午12:15:27, "Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@...ux-mips.org> 写到:
>On Thu, 9 Apr 2020, Jiaxun Yang wrote:
>
>> > Why is using Kconfig supposed to be better? Several configurations
>
>> >support multiple processor types (e.g. swappable CPU daugthercards
>or
>> >FPGA
>> >soft-cores) and having to list CPU types across platforms as CPUs
>are
>> >added is going to be a maintenance nightmare. Whereas having
>> >workarounds
>> >or panics associated with run-time determination of the actual CPU
>type
>> >
>> >guarantees they will trigger where necessary. The use of `init'
>> >sections
>> >assures the reclaim of memory for use after bootstrap.
>>
>> Actually I meant let bug checks depends on Kconfig's CPU selection.
>>
>> It's guaranteed that you can only select one kind of CPU one time,
>> to prevent the overhead of checking bugs on irrelevant processors.
>
>That makes no sense to me sorry. When you select say a MIPS32r2 CPU
>for
>a Malta configuration, you can run it with a 4KE, 24K, 24KE, 34K, 74K,
>1004K, M14K, and probably a few other CPUs I have forgotten about. Are
>
>you suggesting now that you want to require a separate kernel
>configuration for each of these CPUs?
Nope. As the Kconfig is telling about the possibility,
the real CPUTYPE check is still done during boot.
Thanks.
--
Jiaxun Yang
Powered by blists - more mailing lists