Re: Crypto/nx842: Ignore invalid XER[S0] return error

[Haren Myneni <haren@linux.vnet.ibm.com>]

On 12/12/2015 04:05 PM, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 12, 2015 at 03:01:26PM -0800, Haren Myneni wrote:
>> On 12/12/2015 12:43 AM, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
>>> On Fri, Dec 11, 2015 at 07:30:29PM -0800, Haren Myneni wrote:
>>>> NX842 coprocessor sets 3rd bit in CR register with XER[S0] which is
>>>> nothing to do with NX request. On powerpc, XER[S0] will be set if
>>>> overflow in FPU and stays until another floating point operation is
>>>> executed. Since this bit can be set with other valuable return status,
>>>> ignore this XER[S0] value.
>>>
>>> XER[SO] is the *integer* summary overflow bit.  It is set by OE=1
>>> instructions ("addo" and the like), and can only be cleared explicitly
>>> (using "mtxer").
>>
>> Thanks for the correct description. I was told XER[S0] is floating overflow from FPU.
> 
> You can use the Power ISA document to make sure for yourself.
> 
>>>> +	if (ret & ICSWX_XERS0)
>>>> +		ret &= ~ICSWX_XERS0;
>>>
>>> You can just always clear it, there is no need to check if it is set first.
>>
>> Do you mean reset this before calling NX?
> 
> I mean write this as simply
> 
> +	ret &= ~ICSWX_XERS0;
> 
> (without any "if").
> 
>> I believe NX coprocessor should not set CR bit as XER[S0] nothing to do with NX request and it is no use.
> 
> Many instructions set the CR bit to XER[SO] -- store conditional, slbfee.,
> and all "normal" dot insns and of course cmp[l][i].  Or, shorter: "everything"
> does this.
> 
>> NX is copying this CR bit with XER. But reset XER[S0] has to be done before NX request.
> 
> Only if you care what the final value of bit 3 in the CR will be.  Even
> in the unusual case where you want to look at all CR field bits at once
> it is cheap to just mask out the bit (as you do).
> 
>> We can not do this in icswx since this instruction can be used by other coprocessors in future. But I am not comfortable clearing as we are not touching this XER in the driver or result of NX operation. So I am proposing this patch to fix this not proper NX behaviour - ignores CR bit. 
> 
> I really wouldn't call it "not proper", that makes it sound like there
> is an implementation bug or design mistake.  Instead, you could say that
> your switch statement looks at the values of bits 0, 1, and 2, so you
> just mask those -- you do not care about the value of bit 3, so you mask
> it out.
> 
> Something like
> 
> +	/* Mask out the bits we do not care about. */
> +	ret &= ~ICSWX_XERS0;

icswx RFC says CR[3] bit can be undefined or set to XER[S0]. So was thinking NX should have ignored since no use to user. I may be wrong.

Thanks for your help. I will repost this patch with your suggestions.

Thanks
Haren
> 
> 
> Segher
>