From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: 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 ESMTPS id 3CD0B2C0102 for ; Tue, 20 Aug 2013 09:47:28 +1000 (EST) Message-ID: <1376956039.25016.103.camel@pasglop> Subject: Re: Pull request: scottwood/linux.git next From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt To: Scott Wood Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2013 09:47:19 +1000 In-Reply-To: <1376952992.31636.382.camel@snotra.buserror.net> References: <20130808224501.GA8925@home.buserror.net> <1376453881.4255.57.camel@pasglop> <1376499759.31636.15.camel@snotra.buserror.net> <1376514060.4255.73.camel@pasglop> <1376952992.31636.382.camel@snotra.buserror.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Mime-Version: 1.0 Cc: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Mon, 2013-08-19 at 17:56 -0500, Scott Wood wrote: > If we use the generic CPU target then mftb won't get turned into mfspr > (I assume this is what you meant by "tricky asm"). Does mfspr work > everywhere, including from userspace? Or do we need to patch? What > about 403GCX which seems to need some special SPR (I could leave the > existing ifdef alone, but what about vdso)? I think mfspr works everywhere we care about but I might be mistaken :-) I don't think anybody have tried booting a 403 in a looooong time. I would be surprised if it still worked. Cheers, Ben.