All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@codeaurora.org>
To: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
Cc: "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	"linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org" <linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org>,
	Steve Muckle <smuckle@codeaurora.org>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: vfp: fix fpsid register subarchitecture field mask width
Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2013 15:46:18 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <5128034A.4000008@codeaurora.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130222182705.GC19527@mudshark.cambridge.arm.com>

On 2/22/2013 10:27 AM, Will Deacon wrote:
> Hi guys,
>
> On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 08:08:05AM +0000, Stephen Boyd wrote:
>> From: Steve Muckle <smuckle@codeaurora.org>
>>
>> The subarchitecture field in the fpsid register is 7 bits wide.
>> The topmost bit is used to designate that the subarchitecture
>> designer is not ARM. We use this field to determine which VFP
>> version is supported by the CPU. Since the topmost bit is masked
>> off we detect non-ARM subarchitectures as supporting only
>> HWCAP_VFP and not HWCAP_VFPv3 as it should be for Qualcomm's
>> processors.
> I'm struggling to see why this has anything to do with the hwcaps being set
> incorrectly. What value do you have in fpsid? As far as I can tell, the
> subarchitecture bits 6:0 should start at 0x40 for you, right?

Yes it does.

>
> I can see cases for changing this code, I just don't see why it would go
> wrong in the case you're describing.

VFP_arch = (vfpsid & FPSID_ARCH_MASK) >> FPSID_ARCH_BIT;

causes VFP_arch to be equal to 0 because 0x40 & 0xf == 0.

and then a little bit later we have

               if (VFP_arch >= 2) {
                        elf_hwcap |= HWCAP_VFPv3;


The branch is not taken so we never set VFPv3.

-- 
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum,
hosted by The Linux Foundation

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: sboyd@codeaurora.org (Stephen Boyd)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH] ARM: vfp: fix fpsid register subarchitecture field mask width
Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2013 15:46:18 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <5128034A.4000008@codeaurora.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130222182705.GC19527@mudshark.cambridge.arm.com>

On 2/22/2013 10:27 AM, Will Deacon wrote:
> Hi guys,
>
> On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 08:08:05AM +0000, Stephen Boyd wrote:
>> From: Steve Muckle <smuckle@codeaurora.org>
>>
>> The subarchitecture field in the fpsid register is 7 bits wide.
>> The topmost bit is used to designate that the subarchitecture
>> designer is not ARM. We use this field to determine which VFP
>> version is supported by the CPU. Since the topmost bit is masked
>> off we detect non-ARM subarchitectures as supporting only
>> HWCAP_VFP and not HWCAP_VFPv3 as it should be for Qualcomm's
>> processors.
> I'm struggling to see why this has anything to do with the hwcaps being set
> incorrectly. What value do you have in fpsid? As far as I can tell, the
> subarchitecture bits 6:0 should start at 0x40 for you, right?

Yes it does.

>
> I can see cases for changing this code, I just don't see why it would go
> wrong in the case you're describing.

VFP_arch = (vfpsid & FPSID_ARCH_MASK) >> FPSID_ARCH_BIT;

causes VFP_arch to be equal to 0 because 0x40 & 0xf == 0.

and then a little bit later we have

               if (VFP_arch >= 2) {
                        elf_hwcap |= HWCAP_VFPv3;


The branch is not taken so we never set VFPv3.

-- 
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum,
hosted by The Linux Foundation

  reply	other threads:[~2013-02-22 23:46 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-02-22  8:08 [PATCH] ARM: vfp: fix fpsid register subarchitecture field mask width Stephen Boyd
2013-02-22  8:08 ` Stephen Boyd
2013-02-22 18:27 ` Will Deacon
2013-02-22 18:27   ` Will Deacon
2013-02-22 23:46   ` Stephen Boyd [this message]
2013-02-22 23:46     ` Stephen Boyd
2013-02-25 11:18     ` Will Deacon
2013-02-25 11:18       ` Will Deacon
2013-02-26  3:01       ` Stephen Boyd
2013-02-26  3:01         ` Stephen Boyd
2013-02-26 17:54         ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2013-02-26 17:54           ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2013-02-27 17:44           ` Stephen Boyd
2013-02-27 17:44             ` Stephen Boyd
2013-02-25 17:25 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2013-02-25 17:25   ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2013-02-25 20:02   ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2013-02-25 20:02     ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2013-02-27  1:37     ` Stephen Boyd
2013-02-27  1:37       ` Stephen Boyd
2013-02-27 11:22       ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2013-02-27 11:22         ` Russell King - ARM Linux

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=5128034A.4000008@codeaurora.org \
    --to=sboyd@codeaurora.org \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=smuckle@codeaurora.org \
    --cc=will.deacon@arm.com \
    /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.