Commit 14f18b7f authored by Ralf Baechle's avatar Ralf Baechle

On 24K we did always disable cache parity protection - obviously not

the greatest thing to do.  Try to enable parity protection, check if
we actually succeeded and print a message about the outcome of this.
Signed-off-by: default avatarRalf Baechle <ralf@linux-mips.org>
parent 5068debf
...@@ -736,16 +736,12 @@ static inline void parity_protection_init(void) ...@@ -736,16 +736,12 @@ static inline void parity_protection_init(void)
{ {
switch (current_cpu_data.cputype) { switch (current_cpu_data.cputype) {
case CPU_24K: case CPU_24K:
/* 24K cache parity not currently implemented in FPGA */
printk(KERN_INFO "Disable cache parity protection for "
"MIPS 24K CPU.\n");
write_c0_ecc(read_c0_ecc() & ~0x80000000);
break;
case CPU_5KC: case CPU_5KC:
/* Set the PE bit (bit 31) in the c0_ecc register. */ write_c0_ecc(0x80000000);
printk(KERN_INFO "Enable cache parity protection for " back_to_back_c0_hazard();
"MIPS 5KC/24K CPUs.\n"); /* Set the PE bit (bit 31) in the c0_errctl register. */
write_c0_ecc(read_c0_ecc() | 0x80000000); printk(KERN_INFO "Cache parity protection %sabled\n",
(read_c0_ecc() & 0x80000000) ? "en" : "dis");
break; break;
case CPU_20KC: case CPU_20KC:
case CPU_25KF: case CPU_25KF:
......
Markdown is supported
0%
or
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment