From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-12.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER,INCLUDES_PATCH, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2ADBAC433DB for ; Sat, 16 Jan 2021 00:44:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [203.11.71.2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4D8B522AAC for ; Sat, 16 Jan 2021 00:44:22 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 4D8B522AAC Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Received: from bilbo.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [IPv6:2401:3900:2:1::3]) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4DHfSh4J9gzDvWB for ; Sat, 16 Jan 2021 11:44:20 +1100 (AEDT) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=pass (sender SPF authorized) smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com (client-ip=2607:f8b0:4864:20::52a; helo=mail-pg1-x52a.google.com; envelope-from=npiggin@gmail.com; receiver=) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=20161025 header.b=HuKNXDA+; dkim-atps=neutral Received: from mail-pg1-x52a.google.com (mail-pg1-x52a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::52a]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4DHfQq6BkmzDql6 for ; Sat, 16 Jan 2021 11:42:41 +1100 (AEDT) Received: by mail-pg1-x52a.google.com with SMTP id 30so7077226pgr.6 for ; Fri, 15 Jan 2021 16:42:41 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=date:from:subject:to:references:in-reply-to:mime-version:message-id :content-transfer-encoding; bh=ZQNYWV/RLXBfRM+YtaOB8Q/1UCvLHv5bLFTu/vYdz9Y=; b=HuKNXDA+BpDOb9eCfIoGwAC0vD6PF6haeaSvCe3Lt3ACpyZSz3lIl0dx3KM5EXVLs9 4yCp9KVWBe1ONoxcHxjLcyHj2sw+A5Gb3jccfCFrfDb6a7Hagzn2MyGeh00Vz4UNduam 16Pye9FSKsCycHBADN9bWGrKQrKqpZR2oGxhpi1F9Kqni9fF0x9uu4eT6tSmWa2tO6Kx IjHzW5AM1BvcI0i6xJ0RD7xbodGrs00QCSyVvkn2/h05ObtQmQiOSoIAJVhX3In8X+q6 IXgFcKKWqsXjInFE+8cyPigtoelxUj6aiIrnB+Vg4oU5JlQjJ4O39VrbNSfFNxkUZ1ri 5Xog== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:subject:to:references:in-reply-to :mime-version:message-id:content-transfer-encoding; bh=ZQNYWV/RLXBfRM+YtaOB8Q/1UCvLHv5bLFTu/vYdz9Y=; b=j0wqMh6FDEF6/zKnsZ6M6yK3dytcU3Sb7qtRtCLw7DrNpGvpd2j6a52Nw1tjfnYpj7 +V8J9PzQ1bUXhQXNwX0FoIBdR6rfTvPwfhdo7QjxMIHI6NTToHGZ9mCTLCDYegRxbzFr Sgf2JKt6T5tg+JW3IWitOjQZEctDh6KqOADuCZoyqUgp0780YJYmeHRZSSbcpK9WcrcH HZLIl3jkmYqcruw92GkJ9GMNn69GEfX9Z2QvGDIjFyjcBXGK238/pCCQIitoDQEn6dJ+ v+yhv4FOQ5XLyR+g5QNtE/uI4Kej/DnzpBpD17CVYAMcb/6cB6oaW+jOPp6Fss7Ft0fk fAMA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5328deVV8HTno8dFRVHPhNA9P7spGD08JYcaWkTEmr7xOpSjNCap yGfECuD1oasP22VnltS4NLg= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwXp8NMOUTZFNVmiITxlYFSERGkCGpV0ufMBtlg06TLlPkE504AKE6u+apJzgVOdUl6+E9wpw== X-Received: by 2002:a63:101d:: with SMTP id f29mr15110896pgl.165.1610757758314; Fri, 15 Jan 2021 16:42:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost ([124.170.13.62]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id q23sm9380728pgm.89.2021.01.15.16.42.35 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Fri, 15 Jan 2021 16:42:36 -0800 (PST) Date: Sat, 16 Jan 2021 10:42:31 +1000 From: Nicholas Piggin Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 07/39] powerpc: bad_page_fault get registers from regs To: Christophe Leroy , linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org References: <20210115165012.1260253-1-npiggin@gmail.com> <20210115165012.1260253-8-npiggin@gmail.com> <9120125b-6dce-4e89-7113-dfdcea43e191@csgroup.eu> In-Reply-To: <9120125b-6dce-4e89-7113-dfdcea43e191@csgroup.eu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <1610757552.lreg4wgkti.astroid@bobo.none> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-BeenThere: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Sender: "Linuxppc-dev" Excerpts from Christophe Leroy's message of January 16, 2021 3:09 am: >=20 >=20 > Le 15/01/2021 =C3=A0 17:49, Nicholas Piggin a =C3=A9crit=C2=A0: >> Similar to the previous patch this makes interrupt handler function >> types more regular so they can be wrapped with the next patch. >>=20 >> Signed-off-by: Nicholas Piggin >> --- >> arch/powerpc/include/asm/bug.h | 5 +++-- >> arch/powerpc/kernel/entry_32.S | 3 +-- >> arch/powerpc/kernel/exceptions-64e.S | 3 +-- >> arch/powerpc/kernel/exceptions-64s.S | 4 +--- >> arch/powerpc/kernel/traps.c | 2 +- >> arch/powerpc/mm/book3s64/hash_utils.c | 4 ++-- >> arch/powerpc/mm/book3s64/slb.c | 2 +- >> arch/powerpc/mm/fault.c | 13 ++++++++++--- >> arch/powerpc/platforms/8xx/machine_check.c | 2 +- >> 9 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-) >>=20 >> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/bug.h b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/b= ug.h >> index f7827e993196..8f09ddae9305 100644 >> --- a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/bug.h >> +++ b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/bug.h >> @@ -112,8 +112,9 @@ >> =20 >> struct pt_regs; >> long do_page_fault(struct pt_regs *); >> -extern void bad_page_fault(struct pt_regs *, unsigned long, int); >> -void __bad_page_fault(struct pt_regs *regs, unsigned long address, int = sig); >> +void bad_page_fault(struct pt_regs *, int); >> +void __bad_page_fault(struct pt_regs *regs, int sig); >> +void do_bad_page_fault_segv(struct pt_regs *regs); >=20 > What is that do_bad_page_fault_segv() ? Shouldn't it be in a separate pat= ch ? Hmm, yeah probably. It will be an interrupt handler (that doesn't=20 require SIGSEGV argument). Thanks, Nick