[2/3] sun4d updates (guys, please send me real descriptions!)

[2/3] sun4d updates (guys, please send me real descriptions!)

[William Lee Irwin III]

Chris Newport and Thomas Bogendoerfer have been working to get the
sun4d port functional again. This patch updates 2.6.10-rc3 to a current
snapshot of their work. It does the following 3 things:

(1) add sun4d hook to sbus_bus_ranges_init()
(2) fix up pgd_offset() call in sun4d iommu code
(3) fix up sun4d's definition of current

Signed-off-by: Chris Newport <crn@netunix.com>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Bogendoerfer <tsbogend@alpha.franken.de>
Acked-by: William Irwin <wli@holomorphy.com>

Index: sparc32-2.6.10-rc3/drivers/sbus/sbus.c
=================================--- sparc32-2.6.10-rc3.orig/drivers/sbus/sbus.c	2004-10-07 04:01:41.000000000 -0700
+++ sparc32-2.6.10-rc3/drivers/sbus/sbus.c	2004-12-20 19:25:00.395237946 -0800
@@ -217,6 +217,8 @@
  * prom_sbus_ranges_init(), with all sun4d stuff cut away.
  * Ask DaveM what is going on here, how is sun4d supposed to work... XXX
  */
+/* added back sun4d patch from Thomas Bogendoerfer - should be OK (crn) */
+
 static void __init sbus_bus_ranges_init(int parent_node, struct sbus_bus *sbus)
 {
 	int len;
@@ -229,6 +231,18 @@
 		return;
 	}
 	sbus->num_sbus_ranges = len / sizeof(struct linux_prom_ranges);
+	if (sparc_cpu_model = sun4d) {
+		struct linux_prom_ranges iounit_ranges[PROMREG_MAX];
+		int num_iounit_ranges;
+
+	len = prom_getproperty(parent_node, "ranges",
+				(char *) iounit_ranges,
+				sizeof (iounit_ranges));
+		if (len != -1) {
+			num_iounit_ranges = (len/sizeof(struct linux_prom_ranges));
+			prom_adjust_ranges (sbus->sbus_ranges, sbus->num_sbus_ranges, iounit_ranges, num_iounit_ranges);
+		}
+	}
 }
 
 static void __init __apply_ranges_to_regs(struct linux_prom_ranges *ranges,
Index: sparc32-2.6.10-rc3/arch/sparc/mm/io-unit.c
=================================--- sparc32-2.6.10-rc3.orig/arch/sparc/mm/io-unit.c	2004-12-16 06:19:27.000000000 -0800
+++ sparc32-2.6.10-rc3/arch/sparc/mm/io-unit.c	2004-12-20 19:25:00.388239010 -0800
@@ -196,7 +196,7 @@
 			pte_t *ptep;
 			long i;
 
-			pgdp = pgd_offset(init_task.mm, addr);
+			pgdp = pgd_offset(&init_mm, addr);
 			pmdp = pmd_offset(pgdp, addr);
 			ptep = pte_offset_map(pmdp, addr);
 
Index: sparc32-2.6.10-rc3/arch/sparc/kernel/sun4d_smp.c
=================================--- sparc32-2.6.10-rc3.orig/arch/sparc/kernel/sun4d_smp.c	2004-11-17 02:25:41.000000000 -0800
+++ sparc32-2.6.10-rc3/arch/sparc/kernel/sun4d_smp.c	2004-12-20 19:25:00.385239466 -0800
@@ -122,8 +122,7 @@
 		
 	/* Fix idle thread fields. */
 	__asm__ __volatile__("ld [%0], %%g6\n\t"
-			     "sta %%g6, [%%g0] %1\n\t"
-			     : : "r" (&current_set[cpuid]), "i" (ASI_M_VIKING_TMP2)
+			     : : "r" (&current_set[cpuid])
 			     : "memory" /* paranoid */);
 
 	cpu_leds[cpuid] = 0x9;
@@ -460,25 +459,18 @@
 
 void __init smp4d_blackbox_current(unsigned *addr)
 {
-	/* We have a nice Linux current register :) */
-	int rd = addr[1] & 0x3e000000;
+	int rd = *addr & 0x3e000000;
 	
-	addr[0] = 0x10800006;			/* b .+24 */
-	addr[1] = 0xc0800820 | rd;		/* lda [%g0] ASI_M_VIKING_TMP2, reg */
+	addr[0] = 0xc0800800 | rd;		/* lda [%g0] ASI_M_VIKING_TMP1, reg */
+	addr[2] = 0x81282002 | rd | (rd >> 11);	/* sll reg, 2, reg */
+	addr[4] = 0x01000000;			/* nop */
 }
 
 void __init sun4d_init_smp(void)
 {
 	int i;
-	extern unsigned int patchme_store_new_current[];
 	extern unsigned int t_nmi[], linux_trap_ipi15_sun4d[], linux_trap_ipi15_sun4m[];
 
-	/* Store current into Linux current register :) */
-	__asm__ __volatile__("sta %%g6, [%%g0] %0" : : "i"(ASI_M_VIKING_TMP2));
-	
-	/* Patch switch_to */
-	patchme_store_new_current[0] = (patchme_store_new_current[0] & 0x3e000000) | 0xc0a00820;
-	
 	/* Patch ipi15 trap table */
 	t_nmi[1] = t_nmi[1] + (linux_trap_ipi15_sun4d - linux_trap_ipi15_sun4m);
 	
Index: sparc32-2.6.10-rc3/include/asm-sparc/winmacro.h
=================================--- sparc32-2.6.10-rc3.orig/include/asm-sparc/winmacro.h	2004-06-15 22:19:17.000000000 -0700
+++ sparc32-2.6.10-rc3/include/asm-sparc/winmacro.h	2004-12-20 19:25:00.399237338 -0800
@@ -112,9 +112,12 @@
 	and      %idreg, 0xc, %idreg; \
 	ld       [%idreg + %dest_reg], %dest_reg;
 
-/* Sliiick. We have a Linux current register :) -jj */
-#define LOAD_CURRENT4D(dest_reg) \
-	lda	 [%g0] ASI_M_VIKING_TMP2, %dest_reg;
+#define LOAD_CURRENT4D(dest_reg, idreg) \
+	lda	 [%g0] ASI_M_VIKING_TMP1, %idreg; \
+	sethi	%hi(C_LABEL(current_set)), %dest_reg; \
+	sll	%idreg, 2, %idreg; \
+	or	%dest_reg, %lo(C_LABEL(current_set)), %dest_reg; \
+	ld	[%idreg + %dest_reg], %dest_reg;
 
 /* Blackbox - take care with this... - check smp4m and smp4d before changing this. */
 #define LOAD_CURRENT(dest_reg, idreg) 					\
Index: sparc32-2.6.10-rc3/arch/sparc/prom/ranges.c
=================================--- sparc32-2.6.10-rc3.orig/arch/sparc/prom/ranges.c	2004-06-15 22:19:22.000000000 -0700
+++ sparc32-2.6.10-rc3/arch/sparc/prom/ranges.c	2004-12-20 19:25:00.391238554 -0800
@@ -34,7 +34,7 @@
 	}
 }
 
-static void
+/* static */ void
 prom_adjust_ranges(struct linux_prom_ranges *ranges1, int nranges1,
 		   struct linux_prom_ranges *ranges2, int nranges2)
 {
Index: sparc32-2.6.10-rc3/include/asm-sparc/asi.h
=================================--- sparc32-2.6.10-rc3.orig/include/asm-sparc/asi.h	2004-06-15 22:19:22.000000000 -0700
+++ sparc32-2.6.10-rc3/include/asm-sparc/asi.h	2004-12-20 19:25:00.397237642 -0800
@@ -104,7 +104,8 @@
 #define ASI_M_DCDR         0x39   /* Data Cache Diagnostics Register rw, ss */
 
 #define ASI_M_VIKING_TMP1  0x40	  /* Emulation temporary 1 on Viking */
-#define ASI_M_VIKING_TMP2  0x41	  /* Emulation temporary 2 on Viking */
+/* only available on SuperSparc I */
+/* #define ASI_M_VIKING_TMP2  0x41 */  /* Emulation temporary 2 on Viking */
 
 #define ASI_M_ACTION       0x4c   /* Breakpoint Action Register (GNU/Viking) */
 

Re: [2/3] sun4d updates (guys, please send me real descriptions!)

[William Lee Irwin III]

Dave, I got the following hunk from Chris Newport and Thomas Bogendoerfer.
I'm not sure of your opinion regarding sun4d impact on generic sbus
driver code. I can drop this hunk (vs. 2.6.10-rc3) if it's not acceptable.

-- wli

On Mon, Dec 20, 2004 at 08:28:36PM -0800, William Lee Irwin III wrote:
>   * prom_sbus_ranges_init(), with all sun4d stuff cut away.
>   * Ask DaveM what is going on here, how is sun4d supposed to work... XXX
>   */
> +/* added back sun4d patch from Thomas Bogendoerfer - should be OK (crn) */
> +
>  static void __init sbus_bus_ranges_init(int parent_node, struct sbus_bus *sbus)
>  {
>  	int len;
> @@ -229,6 +231,18 @@
>  		return;
>  	}
>  	sbus->num_sbus_ranges = len / sizeof(struct linux_prom_ranges);
> +	if (sparc_cpu_model = sun4d) {
> +		struct linux_prom_ranges iounit_ranges[PROMREG_MAX];
> +		int num_iounit_ranges;
> +
> +	len = prom_getproperty(parent_node, "ranges",
> +				(char *) iounit_ranges,
> +				sizeof (iounit_ranges));
> +		if (len != -1) {
> +			num_iounit_ranges = (len/sizeof(struct linux_prom_ranges));
> +			prom_adjust_ranges (sbus->sbus_ranges, sbus->num_sbus_ranges, iounit_ranges, num_iounit_ranges);
> +		}
> +	}

Re: [2/3] sun4d updates (guys, please send me real descriptions!)

[David S. Miller]

On Mon, 20 Dec 2004 20:39:46 -0800
William Lee Irwin III <wli@holomorphy.com> wrote:

> Dave, I got the following hunk from Chris Newport and Thomas Bogendoerfer.
> I'm not sure of your opinion regarding sun4d impact on generic sbus
> driver code. I can drop this hunk (vs. 2.6.10-rc3) if it's not acceptable.

It looks like it's probably correct.  Each system board is where
the various SBUS's live, and therefore the SBUS relative ranges
need to be adjusted to be relative to the entire system's physical
addressing range.  It appears the iounit ranges do that for the
sun4d SBUS nodes.

Re: [2/3] sun4d updates (guys, please send me real descriptions!)

[William Lee Irwin III]

On Mon, 20 Dec 2004 20:39:46 -0800 William Lee Irwin III wrote:
>> Dave, I got the following hunk from Chris Newport and Thomas Bogendoerfer.
>> I'm not sure of your opinion regarding sun4d impact on generic sbus
>> driver code. I can drop this hunk (vs. 2.6.10-rc3) if it's not acceptable.

On Mon, Dec 20, 2004 at 10:09:26PM -0800, David S. Miller wrote:
> It looks like it's probably correct.  Each system board is where
> the various SBUS's live, and therefore the SBUS relative ranges
> need to be adjusted to be relative to the entire system's physical
> addressing range.  It appears the iounit ranges do that for the
> sun4d SBUS nodes.

Sounds like good news to me. I'll send it on, then. In related news, I
should be able to do more direct sun4d hacking soon. The only obstacles
left are physical logistics wrt. power and the like (thanks Keith!).


-- wli

Re: [2/3] sun4d updates (guys, please send me real descriptions!)

[Jan-Benedict Glaw]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1124 bytes --]

On Mon, 2004-12-20 20:28:36 -0800, William Lee Irwin III <wli@holomorphy.com>
wrote in message <20041221042836.GZ771@holomorphy.com>:
> Index: sparc32-2.6.10-rc3/arch/sparc/prom/ranges.c
> ===================================================================
> --- sparc32-2.6.10-rc3.orig/arch/sparc/prom/ranges.c	2004-06-15 22:19:22.000000000 -0700
> +++ sparc32-2.6.10-rc3/arch/sparc/prom/ranges.c	2004-12-20 19:25:00.391238554 -0800
> @@ -34,7 +34,7 @@
>  	}
>  }
>  
> -static void
> +/* static */ void
>  prom_adjust_ranges(struct linux_prom_ranges *ranges1, int nranges1,
>  		   struct linux_prom_ranges *ranges2, int nranges2)
>  {

I don't know this function (or where it is ment to be called from), but
isn't this an example for __attribute__((unused)) ?

MfG, JBG

-- 
Jan-Benedict Glaw       jbglaw@lug-owl.de    . +49-172-7608481             _ O _
"Eine Freie Meinung in  einem Freien Kopf    | Gegen Zensur | Gegen Krieg  _ _ O
 fuer einen Freien Staat voll Freier Bürger" | im Internet! |   im Irak!   O O O
ret = do_actions((curr | FREE_SPEECH) & ~(NEW_COPYRIGHT_LAW | DRM | TCPA));

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [2/3] sun4d updates (guys, please send me real descriptions!)

[William Lee Irwin III]

On Mon, 2004-12-20 20:28:36 -0800, William Lee Irwin III wrote:
>> -static void
>> +/* static */ void
>>  prom_adjust_ranges(struct linux_prom_ranges *ranges1, int nranges1,
>>  		   struct linux_prom_ranges *ranges2, int nranges2)
>>  {

On Tue, Dec 21, 2004 at 09:57:46AM +0100, Jan-Benedict Glaw wrote:
> I don't know this function (or where it is ment to be called from), but
> isn't this an example for __attribute__((unused)) ?

It's used in drivers/sbus/sbus.c; the commenting out of "static" should
probably die, and the thing should get declared in a header instead of
tripping a warning.


-- wli