From: leif.lindholm@arm.com (Leif Lindholm)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH] arm: Add condition code check to SWP emulator
Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2011 18:35:34 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4ECA99F6.4080207@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAHkRjk4QZxoVmCsB1A3DVb5_WCUvN5NfbYz8PNL_7np7+wHGzQ@mail.gmail.com>
Stepan, thank you for spotting this.
On 11/20/11 10:55, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> On 20 November 2011 08:41, Russell King - ARM Linux
> <linux@arm.linux.org.uk> wrote:
>> There's a much better algorithm to check this. See the bottom of
>> arch/arm/nwfpe/fpopcode.c.
>>
>> It would probably be best for there to be a common function for doing
>> this kind of check, rather than having several implementations of it
>> scattered around the kernel.
>
> That's what Leif started doing.
Yes, I put together an RFC patch set based on that.
But rather than duplicating code, I was looking to break it out for
generic use. And then it was pointed out to me that we also have an
additional implementation in kernel/kprobes-test.c (test_check_cc()).
I forgot to add the cover message on the set I just submitted to the
linux-arm-kernel list, but it was meant to say:
---
There are several locations in the kernel where software needs to
inspect the condition codes of trapped instructions. The original
bitmask implementation in the nwfpe code does this in an efficient
manner. This series breaks this code out of nwfpe/fpopcode.{ch} into
a standalone file for opcode operations, and contains additional
patches to kprobes and SWP eumlation to use this interface.
---
/
Leif
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Leif Lindholm <leif.lindholm@arm.com>
To: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
Cc: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>,
Stepan Moskovchenko <stepanm@codeaurora.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"bryanh@codeaurora.org" <bryanh@codeaurora.org>,
David Brown <davidb@codeaurora.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
tixy@yxit.co.uk
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm: Add condition code check to SWP emulator
Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2011 18:35:34 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4ECA99F6.4080207@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAHkRjk4QZxoVmCsB1A3DVb5_WCUvN5NfbYz8PNL_7np7+wHGzQ@mail.gmail.com>
Stepan, thank you for spotting this.
On 11/20/11 10:55, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> On 20 November 2011 08:41, Russell King - ARM Linux
> <linux@arm.linux.org.uk> wrote:
>> There's a much better algorithm to check this. See the bottom of
>> arch/arm/nwfpe/fpopcode.c.
>>
>> It would probably be best for there to be a common function for doing
>> this kind of check, rather than having several implementations of it
>> scattered around the kernel.
>
> That's what Leif started doing.
Yes, I put together an RFC patch set based on that.
But rather than duplicating code, I was looking to break it out for
generic use. And then it was pointed out to me that we also have an
additional implementation in kernel/kprobes-test.c (test_check_cc()).
I forgot to add the cover message on the set I just submitted to the
linux-arm-kernel list, but it was meant to say:
---
There are several locations in the kernel where software needs to
inspect the condition codes of trapped instructions. The original
bitmask implementation in the nwfpe code does this in an efficient
manner. This series breaks this code out of nwfpe/fpopcode.{ch} into
a standalone file for opcode operations, and contains additional
patches to kprobes and SWP eumlation to use this interface.
---
/
Leif
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-11-21 18:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-11-18 23:21 ARM SWP/SWPB emulation support Stepan Moskovchenko
2011-11-19 15:11 ` Catalin Marinas
2011-11-20 1:04 ` [PATCH] arm: Add condition code check to SWP emulator Stepan Moskovchenko
2011-11-20 1:04 ` Stepan Moskovchenko
2011-11-20 8:41 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-11-20 8:41 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-11-20 10:55 ` Catalin Marinas
2011-11-20 10:55 ` Catalin Marinas
2011-11-21 18:35 ` Leif Lindholm [this message]
2011-11-21 18:35 ` Leif Lindholm
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=4ECA99F6.4080207@arm.com \
--to=leif.lindholm@arm.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.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.