From: Markos Chandras <Markos.Chandras@imgtec.com>
To: "Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@linux-mips.org>,
James Hogan <james.hogan@imgtec.com>
Cc: Leonid Yegoshin <Leonid.Yegoshin@imgtec.com>,
<linux-mips@linux-mips.org>, Ralf Baechle <ralf@linux-mips.org>,
<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] MIPS64: R6: R2 emulation bugfix
Date: Wed, 29 Apr 2015 16:12:41 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5540F4E9.7010100@imgtec.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LFD.2.11.1504291025430.17786@eddie.linux-mips.org>
On 04/29/2015 10:49 AM, Maciej W. Rozycki wrote:
> On Wed, 29 Apr 2015, James Hogan wrote:
>
>>> Error recovery pointers for fixups was improperly set as ".word"
>>> which is unsuitable for MIPS64.
>>>
>>> Replaced by __stringify(PTR)
>>
>> Every other case of this sort of thing uses STR(PTR) (or __UA_ADDR in
>> uaccess.h). Can we stick to STR(PTR) for consistency please?
>
> Or __PA_ADDR in paccess.h.
>
> I have mixed feelings, the reason for __stringify being absent is the
> macro being generic and more recently added than pieces of code that use
> STR, e.g. unaligned.c that has been there since forever. And we do use
> __stringify in many other cases.
>
> On the other hand STR is short and sweet, unlike __stringify.
The patch overall looks good to me so here is my
Reviewed-by: Markos Chandras <markos.chandras@imgtec.com>
I do agree with James that it would be nice to have it in stable 4.0+ as
well.
I don't particularly care if STR() is going to be used at the end or we
stick to __stringify. Both are used in arch/mips/* anyway
--
markos
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Markos Chandras <Markos.Chandras@imgtec.com>
To: "Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@linux-mips.org>,
James Hogan <james.hogan@imgtec.com>
Cc: Leonid Yegoshin <Leonid.Yegoshin@imgtec.com>,
linux-mips@linux-mips.org, Ralf Baechle <ralf@linux-mips.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] MIPS64: R6: R2 emulation bugfix
Date: Wed, 29 Apr 2015 16:12:41 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5540F4E9.7010100@imgtec.com> (raw)
Message-ID: <20150429151241.H70jCMzi7ML0sAwv7jaFhyJMGn5UOBSpvpDdPJdpiTU@z> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LFD.2.11.1504291025430.17786@eddie.linux-mips.org>
On 04/29/2015 10:49 AM, Maciej W. Rozycki wrote:
> On Wed, 29 Apr 2015, James Hogan wrote:
>
>>> Error recovery pointers for fixups was improperly set as ".word"
>>> which is unsuitable for MIPS64.
>>>
>>> Replaced by __stringify(PTR)
>>
>> Every other case of this sort of thing uses STR(PTR) (or __UA_ADDR in
>> uaccess.h). Can we stick to STR(PTR) for consistency please?
>
> Or __PA_ADDR in paccess.h.
>
> I have mixed feelings, the reason for __stringify being absent is the
> macro being generic and more recently added than pieces of code that use
> STR, e.g. unaligned.c that has been there since forever. And we do use
> __stringify in many other cases.
>
> On the other hand STR is short and sweet, unlike __stringify.
The patch overall looks good to me so here is my
Reviewed-by: Markos Chandras <markos.chandras@imgtec.com>
I do agree with James that it would be nice to have it in stable 4.0+ as
well.
I don't particularly care if STR() is going to be used at the end or we
stick to __stringify. Both are used in arch/mips/* anyway
--
markos
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-04-29 15:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-04-28 19:53 [PATCH] MIPS64: R6: R2 emulation bugfix Leonid Yegoshin
2015-04-28 19:53 ` Leonid Yegoshin
2015-04-29 9:17 ` James Hogan
2015-04-29 9:17 ` James Hogan
2015-04-29 9:49 ` Maciej W. Rozycki
2015-04-29 15:12 ` Markos Chandras [this message]
2015-04-29 15:12 ` Markos Chandras
2015-04-29 15:36 ` James Hogan
2015-04-29 15:36 ` James Hogan
2015-04-30 22:43 ` Leonid Yegoshin
2015-04-30 22:43 ` Leonid Yegoshin
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=5540F4E9.7010100@imgtec.com \
--to=markos.chandras@imgtec.com \
--cc=Leonid.Yegoshin@imgtec.com \
--cc=james.hogan@imgtec.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mips@linux-mips.org \
--cc=macro@linux-mips.org \
--cc=ralf@linux-mips.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