Keith Owens wrote: > > As davidm has pointed out, if the OS MCA handler saves the scratch and > preserved registers before calling C and restores the values before > returning to SAL then we have no problems. By definition, the only > registers that matter are those in struct pt_regs. Think of an MCA as > just another type of interrupt, with exactly the same requirements for > saving registers.
That sounds like the right approach. > I am completely dropping the proc_state_dump data area and 90% of the > code in os_mca_dump/restore. Instead of saving everything in sight, I > create a struct pt_regs from the current registers plus some data from > the min_state_save area. That has three benefits - it gets rid of the > special case RSE stack frame, it gives a real pt_regs for unwinding > through the MCA handler and it guarantees that we save the required set > of registers. Thanks, Keith. -- Russ Anderson, OS RAS/Partitioning Project Lead SGI - Silicon Graphics Inc [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ia64" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
