From: "Kevin D. Kissell" <kevink@mips.com>
To: "Kip Walker" <kwalker@broadcom.com>, <linux-mips@linux-mips.org>
Cc: "Ralf Baechle" <ralf@linux-mips.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kernelsp on 64-bit kernel
Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2003 00:08:03 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <01e401c2e2a2$f1866010$10eca8c0@grendel> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 3E651FB7.A38AFD3B@broadcom.com
> Is anyone else interested in having the 64-bit kernel *not* use the CP0
> watchpoint registers for storing the kernel stack pointer for the CPU's
> current process?
>
> I have a couple problems with this:
> - there are read-only bits in watchhi (according to the MIPS64 spec) so
> hoping to save and restore all high 32 bits (as currently coded) seems
> unjustified.
> - somebody might want to actually *use* watchpoints (a JTAG debugger,
> in my case)
For whatever it's worth, I've always maintained that stealing the Watchpoint
registers in this way was a pretty questionable hack to be avoided. Watchpoint
registers are *optional* in MIPS64 and may not even exist. And yes, someone
might want to use them for their intended purpose some day. However, please
note that the EJTAG breakpoint registers are completely orthogonal to the
watchpoint registers.
Regards,
Kevin K.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: "Kevin D. Kissell" <kevink@mips.com>
To: Kip Walker <kwalker@broadcom.com>, linux-mips@linux-mips.org
Cc: Ralf Baechle <ralf@linux-mips.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kernelsp on 64-bit kernel
Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2003 00:08:03 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <01e401c2e2a2$f1866010$10eca8c0@grendel> (raw)
Message-ID: <20030304230803.-Wdy4xWeZx4aybL4nk53eToLONheZHoWvNHIGdLcGZ8@z> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 3E651FB7.A38AFD3B@broadcom.com
> Is anyone else interested in having the 64-bit kernel *not* use the CP0
> watchpoint registers for storing the kernel stack pointer for the CPU's
> current process?
>
> I have a couple problems with this:
> - there are read-only bits in watchhi (according to the MIPS64 spec) so
> hoping to save and restore all high 32 bits (as currently coded) seems
> unjustified.
> - somebody might want to actually *use* watchpoints (a JTAG debugger,
> in my case)
For whatever it's worth, I've always maintained that stealing the Watchpoint
registers in this way was a pretty questionable hack to be avoided. Watchpoint
registers are *optional* in MIPS64 and may not even exist. And yes, someone
might want to use them for their intended purpose some day. However, please
note that the EJTAG breakpoint registers are completely orthogonal to the
watchpoint registers.
Regards,
Kevin K.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-03-04 23:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-03-04 21:50 [PATCH] kernelsp on 64-bit kernel Kip Walker
2003-03-04 23:08 ` Kevin D. Kissell [this message]
2003-03-04 23:08 ` Kevin D. Kissell
2003-03-04 23:16 ` Kip Walker
2003-03-04 23:14 ` Jun Sun
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='01e401c2e2a2$f1866010$10eca8c0@grendel' \
--to=kevink@mips.com \
--cc=kwalker@broadcom.com \
--cc=linux-mips@linux-mips.org \
--cc=ralf@linux-mips.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.