From: Scott Wood <scottwood@freescale.com>
To: Jia Hongtao <hongtao.jia@freescale.com>
Cc: hongtao.jia@freescale.com, B07421@freescale.com,
linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V5] powerpc/85xx: Add machine check handler to fix PCIe erratum on mpc85xx
Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2013 16:51:43 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1365630703.8381.23@snotra> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1365409614-2634-1-git-send-email-hongtao.jia@freescale.com> (from hongtao.jia@freescale.com on Mon Apr 8 03:26:54 2013)
On 04/08/2013 03:26:54 AM, Jia Hongtao wrote:
> @@ -826,6 +829,124 @@ u64 fsl_pci_immrbar_base(struct pci_controller =20
> *hose)
> return 0;
> }
>=20
> +#ifdef CONFIG_E500
> +
> +#define OP_LWZ 32
> +#define OP_LWZU 33
> +#define OP_LBZ 34
> +#define OP_LBZU 35
> +#define OP_LHZ 40
> +#define OP_LHZU 41
> +#define OP_LHA 42
> +#define OP_LHAU 43
Can you move these to asm/ppc-opcode.h (or possibly =20
asm/ppc-disassemble.h if we don't want to mix the two methods of =20
describing instructions)?
> +static int mcheck_handle_load(struct pt_regs *regs, u32 inst)
> +{
> + unsigned int rd, ra, d;
> +
> + rd =3D get_rt(inst);
> + ra =3D get_ra(inst);
> + d =3D get_d(inst);
> +
> + switch (get_op(inst)) {
> + case OP_LWZ:
> + regs->gpr[rd] =3D 0xffffffff;
> + break;
> +
> + case OP_LWZU:
> + regs->gpr[rd] =3D 0xffffffff;
> + regs->gpr[ra] +=3D (s16)d;
> + break;
> +
> + case OP_LBZ:
> + regs->gpr[rd] =3D 0xff;
> + break;
> +
> + case OP_LBZU:
> + regs->gpr[rd] =3D 0xff;
> + regs->gpr[ra] +=3D (s16)d;
> + break;
> +
> + case OP_LHZ:
> + regs->gpr[rd] =3D 0xffff;
> + break;
> +
> + case OP_LHZU:
> + regs->gpr[rd] =3D 0xffff;
> + regs->gpr[ra] +=3D (s16)d;
> + break;
> +
> + case OP_LHA:
> + regs->gpr[rd] =3D 0xffff;
> + break;
> +
> + case OP_LHAU:
> + regs->gpr[rd] =3D 0xffff;
> + regs->gpr[ra] +=3D (s16)d;
> + break;
The X and (especially for PCI) BRX versions are important -- probably =20
more so than the U versions. I doubt we need the A variant.
If you do support the A variant, why are you not sign-extending the =20
value?
Is this erratum present on any 64-bit chips?
-Scott=
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-04-10 21:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-04-08 8:26 [PATCH V5] powerpc/85xx: Add machine check handler to fix PCIe erratum on mpc85xx Jia Hongtao
2013-04-10 2:27 ` Jia Hongtao-B38951
2013-04-10 21:51 ` Scott Wood [this message]
2013-04-11 9:14 ` Jia Hongtao-B38951
2013-04-11 14:47 ` Scott Wood
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=1365630703.8381.23@snotra \
--to=scottwood@freescale.com \
--cc=B07421@freescale.com \
--cc=hongtao.jia@freescale.com \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.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.