From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list linux-mips); Sun, 08 Oct 2006 22:44:44 +0100 (BST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1]:34245 "EHLO dl5rb.ham-radio-op.net") by ftp.linux-mips.org with ESMTP id S20039656AbWJHVom (ORCPT ); Sun, 8 Oct 2006 22:44:42 +0100 Received: from denk.linux-mips.net (denk.linux-mips.net [127.0.0.1]) by dl5rb.ham-radio-op.net (8.13.7/8.13.7) with ESMTP id k98LimlP010070; Sun, 8 Oct 2006 22:44:48 +0100 Received: (from ralf@localhost) by denk.linux-mips.net (8.13.7/8.13.7/Submit) id k98Lii7Y010059; Sun, 8 Oct 2006 22:44:44 +0100 Date: Sun, 8 Oct 2006 22:44:43 +0100 From: Ralf Baechle To: "Kevin D. Kissell" Cc: linux-mips@linux-mips.org, Atsushi Nemoto Subject: Re: [PATCH] ret_from_irq adjustment Message-ID: <20061008214443.GA6254@linux-mips.org> References: <20061009.012423.59032950.anemo@mba.ocn.ne.jp> <006501c6eb07$4fbf66c0$8003a8c0@Ulysses> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <006501c6eb07$4fbf66c0$8003a8c0@Ulysses> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i Return-Path: X-Envelope-To: <"|/home/ecartis/ecartis -s linux-mips"> (uid 0) X-Orcpt: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org Original-Recipient: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org X-archive-position: 12840 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org Errors-to: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org X-original-sender: ralf@linux-mips.org Precedence: bulk X-list: linux-mips On Sun, Oct 08, 2006 at 08:26:44PM +0200, Kevin D. Kissell wrote: > While setting up ra "by hand" and transferring control via the jr > is a reasonable optimization, you're otherwise breaking things for SMTC. > While the comments are misleading (they accurately described an earlier > version of the code), the function being called here is ipi_decode(), which > needs a pt_regs * in the first argument (hence the copy of the sp), and > the pointer to the IPI message descriptor in the second. > > Do you have access to a 34K to test changes to SMTC? I'd have > expected this one to have been pretty quickly fatal. The shakeup of the code by the recent series of pt_regs related cleanups is pretty massive. As of last night I only had uniprocessor support working again. VSMP and SMTC were broken; actual multi-core CPU not tested yet. Ralf