From: "Kevin D. Kissell" <kevink@mips.com>
To: <linux-mips@oss.sgi.com>
Subject: Re: Bug in the _save_fp_context.
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 17:03:49 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <00f901c0b08e$3099bc00$0deca8c0@Ulysses> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 00e901c0b08b$50bed400$0deca8c0@Ulysses
Oops! I hadn't noticed that Carsten had copied the
Linux-MIPS mailing list on this, so I treated it as a
point-to-point communication. The rest of you can
ignore my last paragraph!
Kevin K.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Kevin D. Kissell" <kevink@mips.com>
To: "Carsten Langgaard" <carstenl@mips.com>; <linux-mips@oss.sgi.com>
Sent: Monday, March 19, 2001 4:43 PM
Subject: Re: Bug in the _save_fp_context.
> > 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: linux-mips@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: Bug in the _save_fp_context.
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 17:03:49 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <00f901c0b08e$3099bc00$0deca8c0@Ulysses> (raw)
Message-ID: <20010319160349.QkX6O7LAJ1DQjGlvCSR56Uf1hySSXILS7i5HqM3plrc@z> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 00e901c0b08b$50bed400$0deca8c0@Ulysses
Oops! I hadn't noticed that Carsten had copied the
Linux-MIPS mailing list on this, so I treated it as a
point-to-point communication. The rest of you can
ignore my last paragraph!
Kevin K.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Kevin D. Kissell" <kevink@mips.com>
To: "Carsten Langgaard" <carstenl@mips.com>; <linux-mips@oss.sgi.com>
Sent: Monday, March 19, 2001 4:43 PM
Subject: Re: Bug in the _save_fp_context.
> > 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.
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2001-03-19 15:59 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
2001-03-19 15:43 ` Kevin D. Kissell
2001-03-19 16:03 ` Kevin D. Kissell [this message]
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='00f901c0b08e$3099bc00$0deca8c0@Ulysses' \
--to=kevink@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