* [RFC][PATCH] powerpc/book3e: Fix CPU feature handling on e5500
@ 2011-04-06 5:29 Kumar Gala
2011-04-06 5:41 ` Stephen Rothwell
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Kumar Gala @ 2011-04-06 5:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linuxppc-dev
The CPU_FTRS_POSSIBLE and CPU_FTRS_ALWAYS defines did not encompass
e5500 CPU features when built for 64-bit. This causes issues with
cpu_has_feature() as it utilizes the POSSIBLE & ALWAYS defines as part
of its check.
Signed-off-by: Kumar Gala <galak@kernel.crashing.org>
---
* I'm concerned if its ok to assume 'enum' can handle a 64-bit mask or not.
I'm assuming this is the reason that we use a #define on __powerpc64__
arch/powerpc/include/asm/cputable.h | 4 ++--
1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/cputable.h b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/cputable.h
index be3cdf9..8200e9d 100644
--- a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/cputable.h
+++ b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/cputable.h
@@ -434,7 +434,7 @@ extern const char *powerpc_base_platform;
CPU_FTR_PURR | CPU_FTR_REAL_LE | CPU_FTR_NO_SLBIE_B)
#define CPU_FTRS_COMPATIBLE (CPU_FTR_USE_TB | CPU_FTR_PPCAS_ARCH_V2)
-#ifdef __powerpc64__
+#if defined(__powerpc64__) && !defined(CONFIG_PPC_BOOK3E)
#define CPU_FTRS_POSSIBLE \
(CPU_FTRS_POWER3 | CPU_FTRS_RS64 | CPU_FTRS_POWER4 | \
CPU_FTRS_PPC970 | CPU_FTRS_POWER5 | CPU_FTRS_POWER6 | \
@@ -478,7 +478,7 @@ enum {
};
#endif /* __powerpc64__ */
-#ifdef __powerpc64__
+#if defined(__powerpc64__) && !defined(CONFIG_PPC_BOOK3E)
#define CPU_FTRS_ALWAYS \
(CPU_FTRS_POWER3 & CPU_FTRS_RS64 & CPU_FTRS_POWER4 & \
CPU_FTRS_PPC970 & CPU_FTRS_POWER5 & CPU_FTRS_POWER6 & \
--
1.7.3.4
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: [RFC][PATCH] powerpc/book3e: Fix CPU feature handling on e5500
2011-04-06 5:29 [RFC][PATCH] powerpc/book3e: Fix CPU feature handling on e5500 Kumar Gala
@ 2011-04-06 5:41 ` Stephen Rothwell
2011-04-06 12:26 ` Kumar Gala
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Stephen Rothwell @ 2011-04-06 5:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Kumar Gala; +Cc: linuxppc-dev
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 522 bytes --]
Hi Kumar,
On Wed, 6 Apr 2011 00:29:32 -0500 Kumar Gala <galak@kernel.crashing.org> wrote:
>
> * I'm concerned if its ok to assume 'enum' can handle a 64-bit mask or not.
> I'm assuming this is the reason that we use a #define on __powerpc64__
enums are *ints* and therefore 32 bit. gcc can cope, but warns about it
(I think). So we must use the #define if any of the included bits are
above 2^32.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell sfr@canb.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/
[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 490 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: [RFC][PATCH] powerpc/book3e: Fix CPU feature handling on e5500
2011-04-06 5:41 ` Stephen Rothwell
@ 2011-04-06 12:26 ` Kumar Gala
0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Kumar Gala @ 2011-04-06 12:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stephen Rothwell; +Cc: linuxppc-dev
On Apr 6, 2011, at 12:41 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Kumar,
>=20
> On Wed, 6 Apr 2011 00:29:32 -0500 Kumar Gala =
<galak@kernel.crashing.org> wrote:
>>=20
>> * I'm concerned if its ok to assume 'enum' can handle a 64-bit mask =
or not.
>> I'm assuming this is the reason that we use a #define on =
__powerpc64__
>=20
> enums are *ints* and therefore 32 bit. gcc can cope, but warns about =
it
> (I think). So we must use the #define if any of the included bits are
> above 2^32.
Thanks, I'll rework the patch to use #define.
- k=
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2011-04-06 12:26 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2011-04-06 5:29 [RFC][PATCH] powerpc/book3e: Fix CPU feature handling on e5500 Kumar Gala
2011-04-06 5:41 ` Stephen Rothwell
2011-04-06 12:26 ` Kumar Gala
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox