Linux MIPS Architecture development
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Kevin D. Kissell" <kevink@mips.com>
To: "Carsten Langgaard" <carstenl@mips.com>, <linux-mips@oss.sgi.com>
Subject: Re: Bug in the _save_fp_context.
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 16:43:07 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <00e901c0b08b$50bed400$0deca8c0@Ulysses> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 3AB61293.5652407C@mips.com

> I think there is a bug in the _save_fp_context function in
> arch/mips/kernel/r4k_fpu.S
> 
> The problem is the following piece of code:
> 
>  jr ra
>  .set nomacro
>  EX(sw t0,SC_FPC_EIR(a0))
>  nop
>  .set macro
> 
> First of all what should the ".set nomacro" do?
> If it means that the EX macro shouldn't be used then this entry wouldn't
> get into __ex_table, which would be wrong.
> But it look like it uses the macro anyway, regardless of the ".set
> nomacro", at least with the compiler I use.

Not surprising, really.  "EX" is presumably a cpp macro
that gets expanded by gcc from the .S file, based on
some include file.  .set directives affect only the assembler,
and would inhibit assembler-level macros only.  I'm not
sure just what the definition of an assembler macro
would be - it may or may not include pseudo-instructions
like "la" or "li 32_bit_constant".  I *think* that what the
author was trying to do here was to ensure that the
"sw" instruction in the EX expansion was really and
truly a single instruction.

> Never the less we do not handle entries in the __ex_table which is
> located in a branch delay.
> So we need to handle the situation where we take a page fault on an
> instruction which is located in a brach delay slot, or we don't put the
> "potential" faulting instruction in a delay slot.
> 
> Any ideas, how we should handle this in a nice and clean way?

Is the __ex_table really ending up in the delay slot?
Just looking at the source, I have the impression
that the "sw t0,..." instruction should be in the delay
slot, followed by the __ex_table.

On another topic, now that I've patched the kernel to
turn off the stupid stuck interrupt on my Malta board,
I've realized that I can't just connect my old Atlas SCSI
disk.  I'm torn between ordering a Tekram 390 PCI
SCSI card, which should be able to use our "MIPS
safe" NCR driver as-is (I hope) and buying an IDE
disk and going through the network install ritual.
Which do you recommend?  One thing I really never
knew was just what kernel config options I need to
select to build a kernel that can do the NFS-root
bootstrap.  Can you help me there?

            Regards,

            Kevin K.

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: "Kevin D. Kissell" <kevink@mips.com>
To: Carsten Langgaard <carstenl@mips.com>, linux-mips@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: Bug in the _save_fp_context.
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 16:43:07 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <00e901c0b08b$50bed400$0deca8c0@Ulysses> (raw)
Message-ID: <20010319154307.q3fWPrv0HR9bfOon8T2EZo71K8MpcaN4TFR6lC7PvyI@z> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 3AB61293.5652407C@mips.com

> I think there is a bug in the _save_fp_context function in
> arch/mips/kernel/r4k_fpu.S
> 
> The problem is the following piece of code:
> 
>  jr ra
>  .set nomacro
>  EX(sw t0,SC_FPC_EIR(a0))
>  nop
>  .set macro
> 
> First of all what should the ".set nomacro" do?
> If it means that the EX macro shouldn't be used then this entry wouldn't
> get into __ex_table, which would be wrong.
> But it look like it uses the macro anyway, regardless of the ".set
> nomacro", at least with the compiler I use.

Not surprising, really.  "EX" is presumably a cpp macro
that gets expanded by gcc from the .S file, based on
some include file.  .set directives affect only the assembler,
and would inhibit assembler-level macros only.  I'm not
sure just what the definition of an assembler macro
would be - it may or may not include pseudo-instructions
like "la" or "li 32_bit_constant".  I *think* that what the
author was trying to do here was to ensure that the
"sw" instruction in the EX expansion was really and
truly a single instruction.

> Never the less we do not handle entries in the __ex_table which is
> located in a branch delay.
> So we need to handle the situation where we take a page fault on an
> instruction which is located in a brach delay slot, or we don't put the
> "potential" faulting instruction in a delay slot.
> 
> Any ideas, how we should handle this in a nice and clean way?

Is the __ex_table really ending up in the delay slot?
Just looking at the source, I have the impression
that the "sw t0,..." instruction should be in the delay
slot, followed by the __ex_table.

On another topic, now that I've patched the kernel to
turn off the stupid stuck interrupt on my Malta board,
I've realized that I can't just connect my old Atlas SCSI
disk.  I'm torn between ordering a Tekram 390 PCI
SCSI card, which should be able to use our "MIPS
safe" NCR driver as-is (I hope) and buying an IDE
disk and going through the network install ritual.
Which do you recommend?  One thing I really never
knew was just what kernel config options I need to
select to build a kernel that can do the NFS-root
bootstrap.  Can you help me there?

            Regards,

            Kevin K.

  reply	other threads:[~2001-03-19 15:39 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2001-03-19 14:07 Bug in the _save_fp_context Carsten Langgaard
2001-03-19 15:43 ` Kevin D. Kissell [this message]
2001-03-19 15:43   ` Kevin D. Kissell
2001-03-19 16:03   ` Kevin D. Kissell
2001-03-19 16:03     ` Kevin D. Kissell
2001-03-19 18:14     ` Jun Sun
2001-03-19 16:13   ` Carsten Langgaard
2001-03-19 18:10   ` SCSI card [Re: Bug in the _save_fp_context.] Jun Sun
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2002-01-17 13:34 Bug in the _save_fp_context Carsten Langgaard
     [not found] ` <20020610114323.A25705@lucon.org>
2002-06-10 19:41   ` Carsten Langgaard

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='00e901c0b08b$50bed400$0deca8c0@Ulysses' \
    --to=kevink@mips.com \
    --cc=carstenl@mips.com \
    --cc=linux-mips@oss.sgi.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox