Re: [PATCH 6/14] ps3: smp interrupt fixes

[Geoff Levand <geoffrey.levand@am.sony.com>]

Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Thursday 25 January 2007 03:40, Geoff Levand wrote:
>> --- ps3-linux-dev.orig/arch/powerpc/platforms/ps3/interrupt.c
>> +++ ps3-linux-dev/arch/powerpc/platforms/ps3/interrupt.c
>> @@ -317,22 +317,23 @@ struct ps3_bmp {
>> =EF=BF=BD=EF=BF=BD=EF=BF=BD=EF=BF=BD=EF=BF=BD=EF=BF=BD=EF=BF=BD=EF=BF=BD=
=EF=BF=BD=EF=BF=BD=EF=BF=BD=EF=BF=BD=EF=BF=BD=EF=BF=BD=EF=BF=BD=EF=BF=BDu=
nsigned long unused_1[3];
>> =EF=BF=BD=EF=BF=BD=EF=BF=BD=EF=BF=BD=EF=BF=BD=EF=BF=BD=EF=BF=BD=EF=BF=BD=
=EF=BF=BD=EF=BF=BD=EF=BF=BD=EF=BF=BD=EF=BF=BD=EF=BF=BD=EF=BF=BD=EF=BF=BDu=
nsigned long mask;
>> =EF=BF=BD=EF=BF=BD=EF=BF=BD=EF=BF=BD=EF=BF=BD=EF=BF=BD=EF=BF=BD=EF=BF=BD=
=EF=BF=BD=EF=BF=BD=EF=BF=BD=EF=BF=BD=EF=BF=BD=EF=BF=BD=EF=BF=BD=EF=BF=BDu=
nsigned long unused_2[3];
>> -=EF=BF=BD=EF=BF=BD=EF=BF=BD=EF=BF=BD=EF=BF=BD=EF=BF=BD=EF=BF=BD} __at=
tribute__ ((packed));
>> +=EF=BF=BD=EF=BF=BD=EF=BF=BD=EF=BF=BD=EF=BF=BD=EF=BF=BD=EF=BF=BD} __at=
tribute__ ((aligned (64)));
>=20
> Is that meant to be a 64 _byte_ alignment? By default, it is
> already aligned to 64 bit.
> If 64 byte is some magic requirement by the hypervisor, you
> might want to make that explicit by using a constant definition
> for it.


The status + mask (512 bits) can't cross a page boundary, as required
by the HV.  That is the intent of the aligned (64) attribute.

Sorry, I don't quite understand what you mean by 'using a constant defini=
tion
for it'.  Could you elaborate?

As you suggested I have already changed this to:

struct ps3_bmp {
	struct {
		u64 status;
		u64 unused_1[3];
		u64 mask;
		u64 unused_2[3];
	};
	u64 ipi_debug_brk_mask;
	spinlock_t lock;
};

struct ps3_private {
	struct ps3_bmp bmp __attribute__ ((aligned (64)));
	u64 node;
	unsigned int cpu;
};


>> +=EF=BF=BD=EF=BF=BD=EF=BF=BD=EF=BF=BD=EF=BF=BD=EF=BF=BD=EF=BF=BDcur_cp=
u_spec->cpu_features |=3D CPU_FTR_SMT;
>>=20
> CPU_FTRS_CELL already contains CPU_FTR_SMT, why do you need to enable
> it explicitly?


Yes, I questioned whether that was needed or not.  I'll remove it.

-Geoff