From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from co1outboundpool.messaging.microsoft.com (co1ehsobe002.messaging.microsoft.com [216.32.180.185]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "mail.global.frontbridge.com", Issuer "Microsoft Secure Server Authority" (not verified)) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 00FCF2C00AD for ; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 00:47:31 +1000 (EST) Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2013 09:47:03 -0500 From: Scott Wood Subject: Re: [PATCH V5] powerpc/85xx: Add machine check handler to fix PCIe erratum on mpc85xx To: Jia Hongtao-B38951 References: <1365409614-2634-1-git-send-email-hongtao.jia@freescale.com> <1365630703.8381.23@snotra> <412C8208B4A0464FA894C5F0C278CD5D01C35D42@039-SN1MPN1-003.039d.mgd.msft.net> In-Reply-To: <412C8208B4A0464FA894C5F0C278CD5D01C35D42@039-SN1MPN1-003.039d.mgd.msft.net> (from B38951@freescale.com on Thu Apr 11 04:14:51 2013) Message-ID: <1365691623.3640.0@snotra> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; delsp=Yes; format=Flowed Cc: Wood Scott-B07421 , "linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org" , Li Yang-R58472 List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On 04/11/2013 04:14:51 AM, Jia Hongtao-B38951 wrote: >=20 >=20 > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Wood Scott-B07421 > > Sent: Thursday, April 11, 2013 5:52 AM > > To: Jia Hongtao-B38951 > > Cc: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org; galak@kernel.crashing.org; Wood =20 > Scott- > > B07421; Li Yang-R58472; Jia Hongtao-B38951 > > Subject: Re: [PATCH V5] powerpc/85xx: Add machine check handler to =20 > fix > > PCIe erratum on mpc85xx > > > > The X and (especially for PCI) BRX versions are important -- =20 > probably > > more so than the U versions. I doubt we need the A variant. >=20 > Then I will add X and BRX variant and remove A variant. >=20 > > > > If you do support the A variant, why are you not sign-extending the > > value? >=20 > Just curious, sign-extending the value means fill rd with 0xffffffff? Or 0xffffffffffffffff on 64-bit (even if you're not going to implement =20 64-bit instructions, the ones you do implement shouldn't misbehave =20 there). You could write it as "regs->gpr[rd] =3D ~0UL". -Scott=