From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
Received: from gate.crashing.org (gate.crashing.org [63.228.1.57])
	(using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
	(Client did not present a certificate)
	by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A7B0DDE41
	for <linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org>; Sat, 13 Jan 2007 09:02:06 +1100 (EST)
Subject: Re: [patch][5/5] powerpc: Add the general support for Embedded
	Floating-Point instructions
From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
To: Kumar Gala <galak@kernel.crashing.org>
In-Reply-To: <9F9680DA-DDAD-4DF2-B5FE-6E00CF8A06E2@kernel.crashing.org>
References: <32F3CC26D4DAC44E8ECD07155727A46E816A47@zch01exm20.fsl.freescale.net>
	<1168599942.5011.21.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<BDC705EB-9078-44FD-800E-D9ADD18B9471@kernel.crashing.org>
	<1168635154.5011.31.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<615F9884-6695-485A-A4B4-A53BD98F969E@kernel.crashing.org>
	<1168637277.5011.36.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<9F9680DA-DDAD-4DF2-B5FE-6E00CF8A06E2@kernel.crashing.org>
Content-Type: text/plain
Date: Sat, 13 Jan 2007 09:02:14 +1100
Message-Id: <1168639334.5011.38.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, paulus@samba.org
List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List <linuxppc-dev.ozlabs.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev>,
	<mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@ozlabs.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://ozlabs.org/pipermail/linuxppc-dev>
List-Post: <mailto:linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org>
List-Help: <mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@ozlabs.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev>,
	<mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@ozlabs.org?subject=subscribe>

On Fri, 2007-01-12 at 15:49 -0600, Kumar Gala wrote:
> On Jan 12, 2007, at 3:27 PM, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> 
> >> I think its a fair assumption that nothing is going to interrupt the
> >> handling of the exception, so its safe to assume the process causing
> >> the interrupt will be the same one we return to.
> >
> > What about the get_user to get to the faulting instruction ? I suppose
> > if those processors are UP only and we use an exception with EE
> > disabled, there should be no way the page has been evicted since the
> > access, so that should work, but will that ever be true ?
> 
> For UP we are ok, since nothing else can cause an invalidate.
> 
> How do we handle getting a fault when we are emulating any other  
> instruction?

Well, that's the reason why we had this discussion recently about moving
the local_irq_enable to before the emulation code :-)

Ben.