From: Joe deBlaquiere <jadb@redhat.com>
To: "Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@ds2.pg.gda.pl>
Cc: Ralf Baechle <ralf@oss.sgi.com>, Florian Lohoff <flo@rfc822.org>,
linux-mips@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: [FIX] sysmips(MIPS_ATMIC_SET, ...) ret_from_sys_call vs. o32_ret_from_sys_call
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2001 09:41:49 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3A719ABD.5030206@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: Pine.GSO.3.96.1010126111156.8903B-100000@delta.ds2.pg.gda.pl
Ralf gently pointed out that there was the possibility of needing to
fault the page for *p, which couldn't occur with ints off. So here's an
updated version...
#ifndef CONFIG_CPU_HAS_LLSC
/* this version is inherently single processor! */
/* borrowed from Linux-2.4.0-test12 */
/* mlock/munlock added - jadb@redhat.com */
case MIPS_ATOMIC_SET: {
unsigned int tmp;
unsigned int flags;
p = (int *) arg1;
errno = verify_area(VERIFY_WRITE, p, sizeof(*p));
if (errno)
return errno;
errno = 0;
/* need to prevent page faults with ints off */
if (sys_mlock(p,sizeof(*p)) != 0)
{
return -EAGAIN;
}
/* actually _do_ the exchange */
save_and_cli(flags);
errno |= __get_user(tmp, p);
errno |= __put_user(arg2, p);
restore_flags(flags);
/* i don't think sys_munlock can fail here, and */
/* I wouldn't know what to do if it did, so no */
/* reason to pay attention to the return value */
sys_munlock(p,sizeof(*p));
return tmp;
}
#endif
comments anyone?
Joe
Maciej W. Rozycki wrote:
> On Thu, 25 Jan 2001, Joe deBlaquiere wrote:
>
>
>> So I've got the following code which seems to work... (I can't use the
>> ll/sc ops on the Vr41xx since they are not implemeted!)
>>
>> #ifdef CONFIG_CPU_VR41XX
>
>
> You are perfectly correct, with the exception you really want to make it:
>
> #ifndef CONFIG_CPU_HAS_LLSC
>
> as that's the correct option -- just undef it in arch/mips/config.in for
> your CPU like it's done for others already.
>
> Shame on me I haven't sent the patch for MIPS_ATMIC_SET for non-ll/sc
> processors yet. I have it but it needs a few minor cleanups.
>
> Ralf, BTW, what do you think if we send a segfault on a memory access
> violation instead of returning an error? That would make the behaviour of
> MIPS_ATMIC_SET consistent for any memory contents. Does anything actually
> rely on the function to return an error in such a situation?
>
> Maciej
--
Joe deBlaquiere
Red Hat, Inc.
307 Wynn Drive
Huntsville AL, 35805
voice : (256)-704-9200
fax : (256)-837-3839
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2001-01-26 15:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 33+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2001-01-24 15:30 OOps - very obscure Florian Lohoff
2001-01-24 15:59 ` Florian Lohoff
2001-01-24 16:22 ` Florian Lohoff
2001-01-24 21:18 ` Keith Owens
2001-01-25 12:43 ` Florian Lohoff
2001-01-25 18:59 ` Jun Sun
2001-01-25 19:22 ` Florian Lohoff
2001-01-25 15:55 ` [FIX] sysmips(MIPS_ATMIC_SET, ...) ret_from_sys_call vs. o32_ret_from_sys_call Florian Lohoff
2001-01-25 15:55 ` Florian Lohoff
2001-01-25 16:34 ` Origin 200 crash nick
2001-01-25 18:28 ` [FIX] sysmips(MIPS_ATMIC_SET, ...) ret_from_sys_call vs. o32_ret_from_sys_call Joe deBlaquiere
2001-01-25 19:35 ` Joe deBlaquiere
2001-01-25 22:19 ` Ralf Baechle
2001-01-26 0:53 ` Joe deBlaquiere
2001-01-26 10:21 ` Maciej W. Rozycki
2001-01-26 15:41 ` Joe deBlaquiere [this message]
2001-01-26 21:16 ` Ralf Baechle
2001-01-27 7:20 ` Maciej W. Rozycki
2001-01-26 21:15 ` Ralf Baechle
2001-01-27 7:28 ` Maciej W. Rozycki
2001-01-27 19:42 ` Ralf Baechle
2001-01-29 15:03 ` Maciej W. Rozycki
2001-01-26 20:01 ` Jun Sun
2001-01-26 20:38 ` Joe deBlaquiere
2001-01-26 21:02 ` Jun Sun
2001-04-04 22:13 ` Florian Lohoff
2001-02-19 13:11 ` strace sysmips support (was: Re: [FIX] sysmips(MIPS_ATMIC_SET, ...) ret_from_sys_call vs. o32_ret_from_sys_call) Wichert Akkerman
2001-02-19 19:52 ` newbie question Can Altineller
2001-02-20 7:06 ` David Jez
2001-02-20 20:26 ` Mike McDonald
2001-02-20 20:30 ` nick
2001-02-20 20:53 ` Ralf Baechle
2001-02-20 20:41 ` strace sysmips support (was: Re: [FIX] sysmips(MIPS_ATMIC_SET, ...) ret_from_sys_call vs. o32_ret_from_sys_call) Ralf Baechle
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=3A719ABD.5030206@redhat.com \
--to=jadb@redhat.com \
--cc=flo@rfc822.org \
--cc=linux-mips@oss.sgi.com \
--cc=macro@ds2.pg.gda.pl \
--cc=ralf@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