Fix (workaround?) for BCM Bigsur
Hello All,
the appended patchlet allows to boot current HEAD on a BCM1480. Without it the kernel dies in an unhandled interrupt loop.
Thiemo
---
arch/mips/sibyte/bcm1480/time.c +0 -1
@@ -142,7 +142,6 @@ void __cpuinit sb1480_clockevent_init(void) R_BCM1480_IMR_INTERRUPT_MAP_BASE_H) + (irq << 3)));bcm1480_unmask_irq (cpu, irq); -bcm1480_steal_irq (irq); action->handler = sibyte_counter_handler; action->flags =IRQF_DISABLED |IRQF_PERCPU ;
Quoted 4 lines · Thiemo Seufer
Hello All,
the appended patchlet allows to boot current HEAD on a BCM1480. Without it the kernel dies in an unhandled interrupt loop.
I think it's a bugfix. The whole {sb1250,bcm1250}_steal_irq() irq seems to be a hack papering needed only to paper over other implementation issues.
Ralf
Quoted 10 lines · Ralf Baechle
Quoted 4 lines · Thiemo Seufer
Hello All,
the appended patchlet allows to boot current HEAD on a BCM1480. Without it the kernel dies in an unhandled interrupt loop.
I think it's a bugfix. The whole {sb1250,bcm1250}_steal_irq() irq seems to be a hack papering needed only to paper over other implementation issues.
FYI, I removed all the *_steal_irq stuff in my tree, the resulting kernel works fine on a BCM1480.
Thiemo
Quoted 9 lines · Thiemo Seufer
Quoted 6 lines
Quoted 2 lines
the appended patchlet allows to boot current HEAD on a BCM1480. Without it the kernel dies in an unhandled interrupt loop.
I think it's a bugfix. The whole {sb1250,bcm1250}_steal_irq() irq seems to be a hack papering needed only to paper over other implementation issues.
FYI, I removed all the
*_steal_irqstuff in my tree, the resulting kernel works fine on a BCM1480.
Thanks. I already have f514a361491aea38160f2c9eb4f7494f06b8263a which deletes the thing in my tree and queued for Linus.
Ralf
Quoted 2 lines · Thiemo Seufer
the appended patchlet allows to boot current HEAD on a BCM1480. Without it the kernel dies in an unhandled interrupt loop.
I went a little further in 3b4137342e088f03e0f2c44608b832af7a8af814 but basically the functional change is the same as your patch. It also applies the same to the sb1250 code.
Thanks,
Ralf