linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: dave.martin@linaro.org (Dave Martin)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH] ARM: make head.S register assignments more convenient
Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2011 11:11:05 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20111206111105.GA2270@linaro.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LFD.2.02.1112051528200.2357@xanadu.home>

On Mon, Dec 05, 2011 at 03:31:43PM -0500, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> 
> The r1 (machine ID) and r2 (boot data pointer) values are getting
> in the way of standard procedure calls as those registers are normally
> clobbered by function calls.  This is especially obnoxious when using
> the printascii et cie debugging routines..  This non-standard register
> allocation is even leaking into code far away from head.S i.e. the *_setup
> routines in mm/proc-*.S.
> 
> Move the machine ID / boot data pointer  to r6 and r7 respectively, and
> adjust the surrounding/affected code accordingly.
> 
> Minor fixes to some comments are also included.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Nicolas Pitre <nicolas.pitre@linaro.org>
> ---
>  arch/arm/kernel/head-common.S |  101 +++++++++---------
>  arch/arm/kernel/head-nommu.S  |    4 +-
>  arch/arm/kernel/head.S        |  207 ++++++++++++++++++-----------------
>  arch/arm/mm/proc-arm1020.S    |    8 +-
>  arch/arm/mm/proc-arm1020e.S   |    8 +-
>  arch/arm/mm/proc-arm1022.S    |    8 +-
>  arch/arm/mm/proc-arm1026.S    |    8 +-
>  arch/arm/mm/proc-arm720.S     |   16 ++--
>  arch/arm/mm/proc-arm920.S     |    8 +-
>  arch/arm/mm/proc-arm922.S     |    8 +-
>  arch/arm/mm/proc-arm925.S     |    8 +-
>  arch/arm/mm/proc-arm926.S     |    6 +-
>  arch/arm/mm/proc-feroceon.S   |    8 +-
>  arch/arm/mm/proc-mohawk.S     |    8 +-
>  arch/arm/mm/proc-sa110.S      |   16 ++--
>  arch/arm/mm/proc-sa1100.S     |    8 +-
>  arch/arm/mm/proc-v6.S         |   22 ++--
>  arch/arm/mm/proc-v7.S         |  130 +++++++++++-----------
>  arch/arm/mm/proc-xsc3.S       |   10 +-
>  arch/arm/mm/proc-xscale.S     |    8 +-
>  20 files changed, 302 insertions(+), 298 deletions(-)

Is it also worth changing the other proc-*.S setup rountines to be PCS
compliant too?  This would clean up the calling convention further, and
help avoid future sutprises.

Cheers
---Dave

  reply	other threads:[~2011-12-06 11:11 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-12-05 20:31 [PATCH] ARM: make head.S register assignments more convenient Nicolas Pitre
2011-12-06 11:11 ` Dave Martin [this message]
2011-12-06 11:29   ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-12-06 13:23     ` Dave Martin
2011-12-06 19:01       ` Nicolas Pitre
2011-12-07 11:43         ` Dave Martin

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=20111206111105.GA2270@linaro.org \
    --to=dave.martin@linaro.org \
    --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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).