From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from ozlabs.org (ozlabs.org [203.10.76.45]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "mx.ozlabs.org", Issuer "CA Cert Signing Authority" (verified OK)) by bilbo.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B11DDB707B for ; Fri, 24 Jul 2009 14:52:30 +1000 (EST) 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 10371DDD04 for ; Fri, 24 Jul 2009 14:52:29 +1000 (EST) Message-Id: <7DC40085-9572-4C29-82EC-81CC9EE7F577@kernel.crashing.org> From: Kumar Gala To: Benjamin Herrenschmidt In-Reply-To: <1248387158.25467.3.camel@pasglop> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v935.3) Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/20] powerpc/mm: Add opcode definitions for tlbivax and tlbsrx. Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2009 23:52:23 -0500 References: <20090723055951.7867DDDD1B@ozlabs.org> <883C2E2A-F904-4FDE-9363-BF813B90676D@kernel.crashing.org> <1248387158.25467.3.camel@pasglop> Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Jul 23, 2009, at 5:12 PM, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > On Thu, 2009-07-23 at 10:55 -0500, Kumar Gala wrote: >> On Jul 23, 2009, at 12:59 AM, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: >> >>> This adds the opcode definitions to ppc-opcode.h for the two >>> instructions >>> tlbivax and tlbsrx. as defined by Book3E 2.06 >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Benjamin Herrenschmidt >>> --- >>> >>> arch/powerpc/include/asm/ppc-opcode.h | 6 ++++++ >>> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+) >> >> Do we really have binutils that don't have tlbivax properly at this >> point? > > I don't know for sure, I like being consistent with the rest though > and so I use those macros for all those MMU opcodes. Also means that > I have no problem building with my current toolchain without passing > a specific -mcpu option or anything like that :-) > > We can change that back later if you want. ok, just wondering.. at some point we should decide which way we want to go, since we use "tlbivax" today on e500/fsl-booke. - k