From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
To: michael@ellerman.id.au
Cc: linuxppc64-dev@ozlabs.org,
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>,
linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] powerpc: merged asm/cputable.h
Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2005 09:31:31 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1127777491.15882.106.camel@gaston> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200509270905.29545.michael@ellerman.id.au>
> > There is a small issue here: You turn identify_cpu into C code. However,
> > on ppc32, this is called with the kernel not yet relocated (before
> > prom_init even !). Same with the feature fixup. On ppc32, in order to
> > run C code that early, it needs to be in -mrelocatable bits of code
> > (like prom_init) or use RELOC macros (ugh !).
>
> We could keep the bulk of the patch (turn cur_cpu_spec into a struct) but
> still do identify_cpu() in asm, although it would seem like a step backward.
We can do it in C in ppc32 if we use proper RELOC() macros, or do it in
an -mrelocatable piece of code like prom_init (but I'd like to avoid
that).
> Do people think it's "better" to have one unified asm implementation, or one
> in asm for ppc32 and one in C for ppc64?
We should only need one implementation for both I suppose.
Ben
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-09-26 23:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-09-23 19:08 [PATCH] powerpc: merged asm/cputable.h Kumar Gala
2005-09-24 0:04 ` Paul Mackerras
2005-09-24 0:48 ` Stephen Rothwell
2005-09-24 15:35 ` Kumar Gala
2005-09-26 1:57 ` Michael Ellerman
2005-09-26 22:45 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2005-09-26 23:05 ` Michael Ellerman
2005-09-26 23:31 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt [this message]
2005-09-26 23:22 ` Kumar Gala
2005-09-26 23:38 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
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=1127777491.15882.106.camel@gaston \
--to=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org \
--cc=linuxppc64-dev@ozlabs.org \
--cc=michael@ellerman.id.au \
--cc=sfr@canb.auug.org.au \
/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).