Commit Graph

4 Commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Thomas Gleixner
d2912cb15b treewide: Replace GPLv2 boilerplate/reference with SPDX - rule 500
Based on 2 normalized pattern(s):

  this program is free software you can redistribute it and or modify
  it under the terms of the gnu general public license version 2 as
  published by the free software foundation

  this program is free software you can redistribute it and or modify
  it under the terms of the gnu general public license version 2 as
  published by the free software foundation #

extracted by the scancode license scanner the SPDX license identifier

  GPL-2.0-only

has been chosen to replace the boilerplate/reference in 4122 file(s).

Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Reviewed-by: Enrico Weigelt <info@metux.net>
Reviewed-by: Kate Stewart <kstewart@linuxfoundation.org>
Reviewed-by: Allison Randal <allison@lohutok.net>
Cc: linux-spdx@vger.kernel.org
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20190604081206.933168790@linutronix.de
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2019-06-19 17:09:55 +02:00
Catalin Marinas
25ebee020b [ARM] 4583/1: ARMv7: Add VFPv3 support
This patch adds the support for VFPv3 (the kernel currently supports
VFPv2). The main difference is 32 double registers (compared to 16).

Signed-off-by: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
Signed-off-by: Russell King <rmk+kernel@arm.linux.org.uk>
2008-01-26 14:41:28 +00:00
Daniel Jacobowitz
6a39dd6222 [ARM] 3759/2: Remove uses of %?
Patch from Daniel Jacobowitz

The ARM kernel has several uses of asm("foo%?").  %? is a GCC internal
modifier used to output conditional execution predicates.  However, no
version of GCC supports conditionalizing asm statements.  GCC 4.2 will
correctly expand %? to the empty string in user asms.  Earlier versions may
reuse the condition from the previous instruction.  In 'if (foo) asm
("bar%?");' this is somewhat likely to be right... but not reliable.

So, the only safe thing to do is to remove the uses of %?.  I believe
the tlbflush.h occurances were supposed to be removed before, based
on the comment about %? not working at the top of that file.

Old versions of GCC could omit branches around user asms if the asm didn't
mark the condition codes as clobbered.  This problem hasn't been seen on any
recent (3.x or 4.x) GCC, but it could theoretically happen.  So, where
%? was removed a cc clobber was added.

Signed-off-by: Daniel Jacobowitz <dan@codesourcery.com>
Signed-off-by: Russell King <rmk+kernel@arm.linux.org.uk>
2006-09-20 14:58:35 +01:00
Linus Torvalds
1da177e4c3 Linux-2.6.12-rc2
Initial git repository build. I'm not bothering with the full history,
even though we have it. We can create a separate "historical" git
archive of that later if we want to, and in the meantime it's about
3.2GB when imported into git - space that would just make the early
git days unnecessarily complicated, when we don't have a lot of good
infrastructure for it.

Let it rip!
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00