82xx CPU features

[Vitaly Bordug]

On Tue, 30 Jan 2007 16:35:03 -0600
Kumar Gala wrote:

> 
> On Jan 30, 2007, at 4:31 PM, Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote:
> 
> > On Fri, 26 Jan 2007, Kumar Gala wrote:
> >
> >> For _CAN_NAP, I'm guessing its historic, maybe Dan knows why it  
> >> wasn't set.
> >> What happens if you try to set it?  Are there implications at the  
> >> system level
> >> with regards to _CAN_NAP?
> >
> > Just tested: set CPU_FTR_MAYBE_CAN_DOZE for 82xx,
> > CONFIG_BDI_SWITCH is not
> > defined, echoed 1 to /proc/sys/kernel/powersave-nap - and a 8241
> > still runs... I'll try to measure if there's any difference in power
> > consumption:-))
> >
> >> I'm looking at the CPU_FTR_PPC_LE it varies if we should use  
> >> _PPC_LE vs
> >> _TRUE_LE (or whatever the other one is called).
> 
> It would be good for someone to test an 8260 class (826x, 8272,  
> etc..) to see if they have any issues.

I can see with 8272 if that makes any difference.
--
Thanks, Vitaly
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.ozlabs.org/pipermail/linuxppc-dev/attachments/20070131/bbc775da/attachment.pgp>