Re: [PATCH] powerpc: Don't clobber fr0/vs0 during fp|altivec register save

On Sat, Nov 18, 2023 at 05:45:03PM -0600, Timothy Pearson wrote: > During floating point and vector save to thread data fr0/vs0 are clobbered > by the FPSCR/VSCR store routine. This leads to userspace register corruption > and application data corruption / crash under the following rare

[OT] Re: [PATCH 86/87] fs: switch timespec64 fields in inode to discrete integers

On Sat, Sep 30, 2023 at 09:50:41AM -0500, Steve French wrote: > On Fri, Sep 29, 2023 at 3:06 AM David Howells via samba-technical > wrote: > > > > > > Jeff Layton wrote: > > > > > Correct. We'd lose some fidelity in currently stored timestamps, but as > > > Linus and Ted pointed out, anything

Re: [PATCH v2] powerpc: Fix irq_soft_mask_set() and irq_soft_mask_return() with sanitizer

On Thu, Sep 01, 2022 at 05:22:32AM +, Christophe Leroy wrote: > > > Le 01/09/2022 à 00:45, Segher Boessenkool a écrit : > > Hi! > > > > On Tue, Aug 30, 2022 at 09:10:02AM +, Christophe Leroy wrote: > >> Le 30/08/2022 à 11:01, Nicholas Piggin a écrit : > >>> On Tue Aug 30, 2022 at 3:24

Re: [PATCH] powerpc: Add support for early debugging via Serial 16550 console

On Mon, Aug 22, 2022 at 05:33:35PM +0200, Pali Rohár wrote: > On Monday 22 August 2022 14:25:57 Christophe Leroy wrote: > > Le 19/08/2022 à 23:12, Pali Rohár a écrit : > > > Currently powerpc early debugging contains lot of platform specific > > > options, but does not support standard UART /

Re: [PATCH v2] random: handle archrandom in plural words

On Mon, Jul 18, 2022 at 04:31:11PM +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote: > "Jason A. Donenfeld" writes: > > The archrandom interface was originally designed for x86, which supplies > > RDRAND/RDSEED for receiving random words into registers, resulting in > > one function to generate an int and another

Re: [PATCH kernel v2] powerpc/boot: Stop using RELACOUNT

On Wed, Apr 06, 2022 at 02:01:48PM +1000, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote: > So far the RELACOUNT tag from the ELF header was containing the exact > number of R_PPC_RELATIVE/R_PPC64_RELATIVE relocations. However the LLVM's > recent change [1] make it equal-or-less than the actual number which > makes

Re: [PATCH kernel] powerpc/boot: Stop using RELACOUNT

On Wed, Mar 23, 2022 at 11:18:40AM +1100, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote: > > > On 3/22/22 13:12, Michael Ellerman wrote: > > Alexey Kardashevskiy writes: > > > So far the RELACOUNT tag from the ELF header was containing the exact > > > number of R_PPC_RELATIVE/R_PPC64_RELATIVE relocations. However

Re: [PATCH] powerpc/32: Clear volatile regs on syscall exit

On Wed, Feb 23, 2022 at 05:27:39PM -0600, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > On Wed, Feb 23, 2022 at 09:48:09PM +0100, Gabriel Paubert wrote: > > On Wed, Feb 23, 2022 at 06:11:36PM +0100, Christophe Leroy wrote: > > > + /* Zero volatile regs that may contain sensitive kernel data */ &g

Re: [PATCH] powerpc/32: Clear volatile regs on syscall exit

On Wed, Feb 23, 2022 at 06:11:36PM +0100, Christophe Leroy wrote: > Commit a82adfd5c7cb ("hardening: Introduce CONFIG_ZERO_CALL_USED_REGS") > added zeroing of used registers at function exit. > > At the time being, PPC64 clears volatile registers on syscall exit but > PPC32 doesn't do it for

Re: [PATCH] powerpc/stacktrace: Include linux/delay.h

On Mon, Jul 26, 2021 at 05:42:43PM +0200, Michal Suchanek wrote: > commit 7c6986ade69e ("powerpc/stacktrace: Fix spurious "stale" traces in > raise_backtrace_ipi()") > introduces udelay() call without including the linux/delay.h header. > This may happen to work on master but the header that

Re: [PATCH v8 27/30] powerpc/kprobes: Don't allow breakpoints on suffixes

On Tue, May 18, 2021 at 08:43:39PM +0200, Christophe Leroy wrote: > > > Le 06/05/2020 à 05:40, Jordan Niethe a écrit : > > Do not allow inserting breakpoints on the suffix of a prefix instruction > > in kprobes. > > > > Signed-off-by: Jordan Niethe > > --- > > v8: Add this back from v3 > > ---

Re: [PATCH 1/2] powerpc/sstep: Add emulation support for ‘setb’ instruction

On Thu, Apr 22, 2021 at 06:26:16PM -0500, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > Hi! > > On Fri, Apr 23, 2021 at 12:16:18AM +0200, Gabriel Paubert wrote: > > On Thu, Apr 22, 2021 at 02:13:34PM -0500, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > > > On Fri, Apr 16, 2021 at 05:44:52PM +1

Re: [PATCH 1/2] powerpc/sstep: Add emulation support for ‘setb’ instruction

Hi, On Thu, Apr 22, 2021 at 02:13:34PM -0500, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > Hi! > > On Fri, Apr 16, 2021 at 05:44:52PM +1000, Daniel Axtens wrote: > > Sathvika Vasireddy writes: > > Ok, if I've understood correctly... > > > > > + ra = ra & ~0x3; > > > > This masks off

Re: [PATCH] powerpc/traps: Declare unrecoverable_exception() as __noreturn

On Thu, Feb 11, 2021 at 06:34:43AM +, Christophe Leroy wrote: > unrecoverable_exception() is never expected to return, most callers > have an infiniteloop in case it returns. > > Ensure it really never returns by terminating it with a BUG(), and > declare it __no_return. > > It always GCC to

Re: [PATCH v4 02/10] powerpc/signal: Add unsafe_copy_{vsx, fpr}_from_user()

On Mon, Feb 01, 2021 at 09:55:44AM -0600, Christopher M. Riedl wrote: > On Thu Jan 28, 2021 at 4:38 AM CST, David Laight wrote: > > From: Christopher M. Riedl > > > Sent: 28 January 2021 04:04 > > > > > > Reuse the "safe" implementation from signal.c except for calling > > >

Re: [PATCH] powerpc: add compile-time support for lbarx, lwarx

On Sat, Nov 07, 2020 at 05:42:57AM -0600, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > On Sat, Nov 07, 2020 at 08:12:13AM +0100, Gabriel Paubert wrote: > > On Sat, Nov 07, 2020 at 01:23:28PM +1000, Nicholas Piggin wrote: > > > ISA v2.06 (POWER7 and up) as well as e6500 support lbarx and lwarx. &

Re: [PATCH] powerpc: add compile-time support for lbarx, lwarx

On Sat, Nov 07, 2020 at 01:23:28PM +1000, Nicholas Piggin wrote: > ISA v2.06 (POWER7 and up) as well as e6500 support lbarx and lwarx. Hmm, lwarx exists since original Power AFAIR, s/lwarx/lharx/ perhaps? Same for the title of the patch and the CONFIG variable. Gabriel > Add a

Re: kernel since 5.6 do not boot anymore on Apple PowerBook

On Thu, Aug 27, 2020 at 12:39:06PM +0200, Christophe Leroy wrote: > Hi, > > Le 27/08/2020 à 10:28, Giuseppe Sacco a écrit : > > Il giorno gio, 27/08/2020 alle 09.46 +0200, Giuseppe Sacco ha scritto: > > > Il giorno gio, 27/08/2020 alle 00.28 +0200, Giuseppe Sacco ha scritto: > > > > Hello

Re: [PATCH] powerpc: Update documentation of ISA versions for Power10

On Tue, Aug 25, 2020 at 09:45:07PM +1000, Jordan Niethe wrote: > Update the CPU to ISA Version Mapping document to include Power10 and > ISA v3.1. > > Signed-off-by: Jordan Niethe > --- > Documentation/powerpc/isa-versions.rst | 4 > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+) > > diff --git

Re: Re：Re: [PATCH] powerpc: Fix a bug in __div64_32 if divisor is zero

On Sun, Aug 23, 2020 at 12:54:33AM +0800, Guohua Zhong wrote: > >In generic version in lib/math/div64.c, there is no checking of 'base' > >either. > >Do we really want to add this check in the powerpc version only ? > > >The only user of __div64_32() is do_div() in >

Re: [PATCH v2 2/5] powerpc: Allow 4224 bytes of stack expansion for the signal frame

On Fri, Jul 24, 2020 at 07:25:25PM +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote: > We have powerpc specific logic in our page fault handling to decide if > an access to an unmapped address below the stack pointer should expand > the stack VMA. > > The code was originally added in 2004 "ported from 2.4". The

Re: [PATCH] KVM: PPC: Book3S HV: Fix typos in comments

On Fri, Mar 06, 2020 at 11:26:36AM +1100, Gustavo Romero wrote: > Fix typos found in comments about the parameter passed > through r5 to kvmppc_{save,restore}_tm_hv functions. Actually "iff" is a common shorthand in some fields and not necessarily a spelling error:

Re: [PosibleSpam] Re: z constraint in powerpc inline assembly ?

On Thu, Jan 16, 2020 at 07:57:29AM -0600, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > On Thu, Jan 16, 2020 at 09:06:08AM +0100, Gabriel Paubert wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 16, 2020 at 07:11:36AM +0100, Christophe Leroy wrote: > > > Hi Segher, > > > > > > I'm trying to see if we cou

Re: z constraint in powerpc inline assembly ?

On Thu, Jan 16, 2020 at 07:11:36AM +0100, Christophe Leroy wrote: > Hi Segher, > > I'm trying to see if we could enhance TCP checksum calculations by splitting > inline assembly blocks to give GCC the opportunity to mix it with other > stuff, but I'm getting difficulties with the carry. > > As

Re: [PATCH v12 01/12] lib: introduce copy_struct_{to, from}_user helpers

On Thu, Sep 05, 2019 at 11:09:35AM +0200, Andreas Schwab wrote: > On Sep 05 2019, Aleksa Sarai wrote: > > > diff --git a/lib/struct_user.c b/lib/struct_user.c > > new file mode 100644 > > index ..7301ab1bbe98 > > --- /dev/null > > +++ b/lib/struct_user.c > > @@ -0,0 +1,182 @@ > > +//

Re: [PATCH v2 3/6] powerpc: Convert flush_icache_range & friends to C

On Tue, Sep 03, 2019 at 01:31:57PM -0500, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > On Tue, Sep 03, 2019 at 07:05:19PM +0200, Christophe Leroy wrote: > > Le 03/09/2019 à 18:04, Segher Boessenkool a écrit : > > >(Why are they separate though? It could just be one loop var). > > > > Yes it could just be a

Re: [PATCH v13 00/10] powerpc: Switch to CONFIG_THREAD_INFO_IN_TASK

On Thu, Jan 24, 2019 at 04:58:41PM +0100, Christophe Leroy wrote: > > > Le 24/01/2019 à 16:01, Christophe Leroy a écrit : > > > > > > Le 24/01/2019 à 10:43, Christophe Leroy a écrit : > > > > > > > > > On 01/24/2019 01:06 AM, Michael Ellerman wrote: > > > > Christophe Leroy writes: > > > >

Re: [PATCH v2 13/29] arch: add split IPC system calls where needed

On Fri, Jan 18, 2019 at 05:18:19PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > The IPC system call handling is highly inconsistent across architectures, > some use sys_ipc, some use separate calls, and some use both. We also > have some architectures that require passing IPC_64 in the flags, and > others that

Re: [PATCH] powerpc/4xx/ocm: fix compiler error

On Sat, Dec 22, 2018 at 05:04:51PM -0600, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > On Sat, Dec 22, 2018 at 08:37:28PM +0100, christophe leroy wrote: > > Le 22/12/2018 à 18:16, Segher Boessenkool a écrit : > > >On Sat, Dec 22, 2018 at 02:08:02PM +0100, christophe leroy wrote: > > >> > > >>Usually, Guarded

Re: Looking for architecture papers

On Thu, Oct 04, 2018 at 10:41:13AM +0300, Raz wrote: > Frankly, the more I read the more perplexed I get. For example, > according to BOOK III-S, chapter 3, > the MSR bits are differ from the ones described in > arch/powerpc/include/asm/reg.h. > Bit zero, is LE, but in the book it is 64-bit mode.

Re: [PATCH 1/2] powerpc/pkeys: preallocate execute_only key only if the key is available.

On Fri, Jun 29, 2018 at 09:58:37PM -0300, Thiago Jung Bauermann wrote: > > Gabriel Paubert writes: > > > On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 11:56:34PM -0300, Thiago Jung Bauermann wrote: > >> > >> Hello, > >> > >> Ram Pai writes: > >> &g

Re: [PATCH 1/2] powerpc/pkeys: preallocate execute_only key only if the key is available.

On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 11:56:34PM -0300, Thiago Jung Bauermann wrote: > > Hello, > > Ram Pai writes: > > > Key 2 is preallocated and reserved for execute-only key. In rare > > cases if key-2 is unavailable, mprotect(PROT_EXEC) will behave > > incorrectly. NOTE: mprotect(PROT_EXEC) uses

Re: [PATCH v3 00/12] macintosh: Resolve various PMU driver problems

On Wed, Jun 27, 2018 at 05:39:15PM +1200, Michael Schmitz wrote: > Ben, > > Am 27.06.2018 um 15:27 schrieb Benjamin Herrenschmidt: > > On Wed, 2018-06-27 at 13:08 +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote: > > > > I will rewrite patch 10/12 after Arnd's fixes and this series have all > > > > made their way

Re: [PATCH v4 3/4] powerpc/lib: implement strlen() in assembly

On Fri, Jun 08, 2018 at 10:20:41AM +, Christophe Leroy wrote: > The generic implementation of strlen() reads strings byte per byte. > > This patch implements strlen() in assembly based on a read of entire > words, in the same spirit as what some other arches and glibc do. > > On a 8xx the

Re: administrivia: mails containing HTML attachments

On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 02:48:29PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi all, > > I have decided that any email sent to the linuxppc-dev mailing list > that contains an HTML attachment (or is just an HTML email) will be > rejected. The vast majority of such mail are spam (and I have to spend >

Re: [PATCH v2 01/10] powerpc: Add security feature flags for Spectre/Meltdown

On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 11:01:44PM +1100, Michael Ellerman wrote: > This commit adds security feature flags to reflect the settings we > receive from firmware regarding Spectre/Meltdown mitigations. > > The feature names reflect the names we are given by firmware on bare > metal machines. See the

Re: RFC on writel and writel_relaxed

On Thu, Mar 22, 2018 at 08:25:43PM +1100, Oliver wrote: > On Thu, Mar 22, 2018 at 7:20 PM, Gabriel Paubert <paub...@iram.es> wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 22, 2018 at 04:24:24PM +1100, Oliver wrote: > >> On Thu, Mar 22, 2018 at 1:35 AM, David Laight <david.lai...@aculab.com>

Re: RFC on writel and writel_relaxed

On Thu, Mar 22, 2018 at 04:24:24PM +1100, Oliver wrote: > On Thu, Mar 22, 2018 at 1:35 AM, David Laight wrote: > >> x86 has compiler barrier inside the relaxed() API so that code does not > >> get reordered. ARM64 architecturally guarantees device writes to be > >>

Re: Wifi (B43) broken on G4 PowerBooks with kernel v4.15

On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 10:03:46AM +, James Hogan wrote: > On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 10:37:30AM +0100, Gabriel Paubert wrote: > > Hi, > > > > yesterday I recompiled the kernel on my late 2005 G4 PowerBook, and the > > Wifi stopped working. After comparing the

Wifi (B43) broken on G4 PowerBooks with kernel v4.15

, and I'm not sure that I fully understand it. Nevertheless the following patch fixes the regression, but there might be a better way to solve the problem. If you pick up this trivial patch as is, you may add: Signed-off-by: Gabriel Paubert <paub...@iram.es> diff --git a/drivers/ssb/Kco

Re: [PATCH] macintosh: Add module license to ans-lcd

On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 01:33:08PM -0600, Larry Finger wrote: > In kernel 4.15, the modprobe step on my PowerBook G5 started complaining that PowerBook G5? Really, could you send a pic! :-) > there was no module license for ans-lcd. > > Signed-off-by: Larry Finger

Re: [RFC PATCH 3/8] powerpc/64s: put the per-cpu data_offset in r14

On Thu, Dec 21, 2017 at 12:52:01AM +1000, Nicholas Piggin wrote: > Shifted left by 16 bits, so the low 16 bits of r14 remain available. > This allows per-cpu pointers to be dereferenced with a single extra > shift whereas previously it was a load and add. > --- > arch/powerpc/include/asm/paca.h

Re: [PATCH v9 29/51] mm/mprotect, powerpc/mm/pkeys, x86/mm/pkeys: Add sysfs interface

On Mon, Dec 18, 2017 at 03:15:51PM -0800, Ram Pai wrote: > On Mon, Dec 18, 2017 at 02:28:14PM -0800, Dave Hansen wrote: > > On 12/18/2017 02:18 PM, Ram Pai wrote: > > > b) minimum number of keys available to the application. > > > if libraries consumes a few, they could provide a library > > >

Re: [PATCH][V2] crypto/nx: fix spelling mistake: "availavle" -> "available"

On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 02:32:17PM +, Colin King wrote: > From: Colin Ian King > > Trivial fix to spelling mistake in pr_err error message text. Also > fix spelling mistake in proceeding comment. s/proceeding/preceding/ ? > > Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King

Re: [PATCH v3 4/5] powerpc/lib/sstep: Add prty instruction emulation

On Tue, Jul 25, 2017 at 06:08:05PM +1000, Balbir Singh wrote: > On Tue, 2017-07-25 at 13:33 +1000, Matt Brown wrote: > > This adds emulation for the prtyw and prtyd instructions. > > Tested for logical correctness against the prtyw and prtyd instructions > > on ppc64le. > > > > Signed-off-by:

Re: [PATCH v3 2/5] powerpc/lib/sstep: Add popcnt instruction emulation

On Tue, Jul 25, 2017 at 01:33:17PM +1000, Matt Brown wrote: > This adds emulations for the popcntb, popcntw, and popcntd instructions. > Tested for correctness against the popcnt{b,w,d} instructions on ppc64le. > > Signed-off-by: Matt Brown > --- > v3: > -

Re: [PATCH 3/5] powerpc/lib/sstep: Add bpermd instruction emulation

On Thu, Jul 13, 2017 at 01:25:46PM +1000, Matt Brown wrote: > This adds emulation for the bpermd instruction. > > Signed-off-by: Matt Brown > --- > arch/powerpc/lib/sstep.c | 23 +++ > 1 file changed, 23 insertions(+) > > diff --git

Re: [PATCH] powerpc: Avoid panic during boot due to divide by zero in init_cache_info()

On Sun, Mar 05, 2017 at 11:24:56AM -0600, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > On Sun, Mar 05, 2017 at 05:58:37PM +0100, Gabriel Paubert wrote: > > > > Erk sorry. One of the static checkers spotted it, but I hadn't got > > > > around to fixing it because it seemed to

Re: [PATCH] powerpc: Avoid panic during boot due to divide by zero in init_cache_info()

On Sun, Mar 05, 2017 at 06:37:37AM -0600, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > On Sun, Mar 05, 2017 at 09:26:47PM +1100, Michael Ellerman wrote: > > > I see a panic in early boot when building with a recent gcc toolchain. > > > The issue is a divide by zero, which is undefined. Older toolchains > > > let

Re: [PATCH 0/2] Allow configurable stack size (especially 32k on PPC64)

On Tue, Feb 21, 2017 at 09:24:38AM +1300, Hamish Martin wrote: > This patch series adds the ability to configure the THREAD_SHIFT value and > thereby alter the stack size on powerpc systems. We are particularly > interested > in configuring for a 32k stack on PPC64. > > Using an NXP T2081 (e6500

Re: [PATCH v3 11/11] powerpc: rewrite local_t using soft_irq

Hi, On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 11:34:52PM +0530, Madhavan Srinivasan wrote: > Local atomic operations are fast and highly reentrant per CPU counters. > Used for percpu variable updates. Local atomic operations only guarantee > variable modification atomicity wrt the CPU which owns the data

Re: [PATCH v3 2/5] firmware: annotate thou shalt not request fw on init or probe

On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 05:45:04PM -0700, mcg...@kernel.org wrote: [snip] > --- > Documentation/firmware_class/README| 20 > drivers/base/Kconfig | 2 +- > .../request_firmware-avoid-init-probe-init.cocci | 130 > + > 3

Re: [PATCH] powerpc/8xx: fix single_step debug

On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 12:13:21PM +0200, Christophe Leroy wrote: > > > Le 18/08/2016 à 11:58, Gabriel Paubert a écrit : > >On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 11:44:20AM +0200, Christophe Leroy wrote: > >>SPRN_ICR must be read for clearing the internal freeze signal which > >&

Re: [PATCH] powerpc/8xx: fix single_step debug

On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 11:44:20AM +0200, Christophe Leroy wrote: > SPRN_ICR must be read for clearing the internal freeze signal which > is asserted by the single step exception, otherwise the timebase and > decrementer remain freezed Minor nit: s/freezed/frozen/ If the timebase and decrementer

Re: [PATCH] powerpc/32: Remove one insn in __bswapdi2

On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 05:11:19PM -0500, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 11:34:37PM +0200, Gabriel Paubert wrote: > > On the other hand gcc did at the time a very poor job (quite an > > understatement) at bswapdi when compiling for 64 bit processors >

Re: [PATCH] powerpc/32: Remove one insn in __bswapdi2

On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 12:18:15PM +0200, Christophe Leroy wrote: > > > Le 10/08/2016 à 10:56, Gabriel Paubert a écrit : > >On Fri, Aug 05, 2016 at 01:28:02PM +0200, Christophe Leroy wrote: > >>Signed-off-by: Christophe Leroy <christophe.le...@c-s.fr> > >>

Re: [PATCH] powerpc/32: Remove one insn in __bswapdi2

On Fri, Aug 05, 2016 at 01:28:02PM +0200, Christophe Leroy wrote: > Signed-off-by: Christophe Leroy > --- > arch/powerpc/kernel/misc_32.S | 3 +-- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kernel/misc_32.S

Re: [PATCH] powerpc: Fix crash during static key init on ppc32

On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 01:17:55AM -0700, Christian Kujau wrote: > On Wed, 10 Aug 2016, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > > We cannot do those initializations from apply_feature_fixups() as > > this function runs in a very restricted environment in 32-bit where > > the kernel isn't running at its

Re: [PATCH 1/3] powerpc: Avoid load hit store in __giveup_fpu() and __giveup_altivec()

On Sun, May 29, 2016 at 10:03:50PM +1000, Anton Blanchard wrote: > From: Anton Blanchard > > In both __giveup_fpu() and __giveup_altivec() we make two modifications > to tsk->thread.regs->msr. gcc decides to do a read/modify/write of > each change, so we end up with a load hit

Re: [PATCH] powerpc32: use stmw/lmw for non volatile registers save/restore

On Mon, May 23, 2016 at 10:46:36AM +0200, Christophe Leroy wrote: > lmw/stmw have a 1 cycle (2 cycles for lmw on some ppc) in addition > and implies serialising, however it reduces the amount of instructions > hence the amount of instruction fetch compared to the equivalent > operation with

Re: [PATCH] powerpc: inline current_stack_pointer()

On Mon, May 23, 2016 at 10:46:02AM +0200, Christophe Leroy wrote: > current_stack_pointeur() is a single instruction function. it > It is not worth breaking the execution flow with a bl/blr for a > single instruction Are you sure that the result is always the same? Calling an external function

Re: powerpc: Discard ffs() function and use builtin_ffs instead

On Fri, May 13, 2016 at 04:16:57PM +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote: > On Thu, 2016-12-05 at 15:32:22 UTC, Christophe Leroy wrote: > > With the ffs() function as defined in arch/powerpc/include/asm/bitops.h > > GCC will not optimise the code in case of constant parameter, as shown > > by the small

Re: [PATCH v3] ppc64/book3s: fix branching to out of line handlers in relocation kernel

Hi Michael, On Fri, Apr 01, 2016 at 05:14:35PM +1100, Michael Ellerman wrote: > On Wed, 2016-03-30 at 23:49 +0530, Hari Bathini wrote: > > Some of the interrupt vectors on 64-bit POWER server processors are > > only 32 bytes long (8 instructions), which is not enough for the full > ... > >

Re: [1/1] powerpc/embedded6xx: Make reboot works on MVME5100

On Wed, Mar 09, 2016 at 03:26:21PM -0600, Scott Wood wrote: > On Wed, 2016-03-09 at 11:28 +0100, Gabriel Paubert wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 09, 2016 at 12:38:18AM -0600, Scott Wood wrote: > > > On Tue, Mar 08, 2016 at 08:59:12AM +0100, Alessio Igor Bogani wrote: > > > &

Re: [1/1] powerpc/embedded6xx: Make reboot works on MVME5100

On Wed, Mar 09, 2016 at 12:38:18AM -0600, Scott Wood wrote: > On Tue, Mar 08, 2016 at 08:59:12AM +0100, Alessio Igor Bogani wrote: > > The mtmsr() function hangs during restart. Make reboot works on > > MVME5100 removing that function call. > > --- > >

Re: [PATCH v3 2/3] powerpc: Add __raw_rm_writeq() function

On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 01:43:12PM +1100, Alistair Popple wrote: > Move __raw_rw_writeq() from platforms/powernv/pci-ioda.c to ^ Typo? (not a big deal) Gabriel > include/asm/io.h so that it can be used by other code. > > Signed-off-by: Alistair Popple >

Re: [P.A. Semi] Does the ethernet interface work on your Electra, Chitra, Nemo, and Athena board?

On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 06:08:23PM +0100, Christian Zigotzky wrote: > Hi All, > > I have tested the PA Semi Ethernet with the kernels 4.2.3 and 4.3.0 > today. With the kernel 4.2.3 it works but with the kernel 4.3.0 > final it doesn't work. > > After that I tested some git kernels and release

Re: [PATCH v2] powerpc/mpc5xxx: Avoid dereferencing potentially freed memory

On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 08:20:13AM +0200, Christophe JAILLET wrote: > Le 15/10/2015 08:36, Michael Ellerman a écrit : > >On Thu, 2015-10-15 at 07:56 +0200, Christophe JAILLET wrote: > >>Use 'of_property_read_u32()' instead of 'of_get_property()'+pointer > >>dereference in order to avoid access to

Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] powerpc/selftest: Add gettimeofday() benchmark

On Fri, Sep 25, 2015 at 12:28:30PM +0300, Denis Kirjanov wrote: > On 9/25/15, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > On Friday 25 September 2015 14:01:39 Michael Neuling wrote: > >> This adds a benchmark directory to the powerpc selftests and adds a > >> gettimeofday() benchmark to it. > >> > >>

Re: [RFC 5/8] powerpc/slb: Add documentation to runtime patching of SLB encoding

On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 03:51:03PM +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote: On Tue, 2015-07-21 at 12:28 +0530, Anshuman Khandual wrote: From: khand...@linux.vnet.ibm.com khand...@linux.vnet.ibm.com This patch adds some documentation to 'patch_slb_encoding' function explaining about how it clears

Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] selftests/powerpc: Add a test of the switch_endian() syscall

On Sat, Mar 28, 2015 at 12:19:10PM +1100, Michael Ellerman wrote: This adds a test of the switch_endian() syscall we added in the previous commit. We test it by calling the endian switch syscall, and then executing some code in the other endian to check everything went as expected. That code

Re: AW: SPE Interrupt context (was how to make use of SPE instructions)

On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 05:37:29AM +, Markus Stockhausen wrote: Von: Scott Wood [scottw...@freescale.com] Gesendet: Freitag, 30. Januar 2015 01:49 An: Markus Stockhausen Cc: Michael Ellerman; linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org; Herbert Xu Betreff: Re: AW: SPE Interrupt context (was how

Re: AW: SPE Interrupt context (was how to make use of SPE instructions)

On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 09:39:41AM +, Markus Stockhausen wrote: Von: Gabriel Paubert [paub...@iram.es] Gesendet: Freitag, 30. Januar 2015 09:49 An: Markus Stockhausen Cc: Scott Wood; linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org; Herbert Xu Betreff: Re: AW: SPE Interrupt context (was how to make

Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2]powerpc: foundation code to handle CR5 for local_t

On Wed, Dec 03, 2014 at 08:29:37PM +0530, Madhavan Srinivasan wrote: On Tuesday 02 December 2014 03:05 AM, Gabriel Paubert wrote: On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 05:48:40PM +0530, Madhavan Srinivasan wrote: diff --git a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/exception-64s.h b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/exception

Re: [RFC PATCH 2/2]powerpc: rewrite local_* to use CR5 flag

On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 05:48:41PM +0530, Madhavan Srinivasan wrote: This patch re-write the current local_* functions to CR5 based one. Base flow for each function is { set cr5(eq) load .. store clear cr5(eq) } Above set of instructions are followed by

Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2]powerpc: foundation code to handle CR5 for local_t

On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 05:48:40PM +0530, Madhavan Srinivasan wrote: This patch create the infrastructure to handle the CR based local_* atomic operations. Local atomic operations are fast and highly reentrant per CPU counters. Used for percpu variable updates. Local atomic operations only

Re: deb-pkg: Add support for powerpc little endian

On Fri, Sep 05, 2014 at 03:28:47PM +1000, Michael Neuling wrote: The Debian powerpc little endian architecture is called ppc64le. This Huh? ppc64le or ppc64el? is the default architecture used by Ubuntu for powerpc. The below checks the kernel config to see if we are compiling little

Re: TTM placement caching issue/questions

On Wed, Sep 03, 2014 at 10:36:57PM -0400, Jerome Glisse wrote: On Wed, Sep 03, 2014 at 10:31:18PM -0400, Jerome Glisse wrote: On Thu, Sep 04, 2014 at 12:25:23PM +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: On Wed, 2014-09-03 at 22:07 -0400, Jerome Glisse wrote: So in the meantime the

Re: power and percpu: Could we move the paca into the percpu area?

On Thu, Jun 12, 2014 at 07:26:39AM -0500, Segher Boessenkool wrote: Actually, from gcc/config/rs6000.h: /* 1 for registers that have pervasive standard uses and are not available for the register allocator. [snip] So cr5, which is number 73, is never used by gcc. Not

Re: power and percpu: Could we move the paca into the percpu area?

On Thu, Jun 12, 2014 at 06:22:11AM +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: On Wed, 2014-06-11 at 14:37 -0500, Christoph Lameter wrote: Looking at arch/powerpc/include/asm/percpu.h I see that the per cpu offset comes from a local_paca field and local_paca is in r13. That means that for all

Re: [PATCH] powerpc: irq work racing with timer interrupt can result in timer interrupt hang

On Fri, May 09, 2014 at 06:41:13AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: On Fri, May 09, 2014 at 05:47:12PM +1000, Anton Blanchard wrote: I am seeing an issue where a CPU running perf eventually hangs. Traces show timer interrupts happening every 4 seconds even when a userspace task is running on

Re: [PATCH 3/3] perf: Use 64-bit value when comparing sample_regs

On Thu, Mar 06, 2014 at 09:44:47AM +, David Laight wrote: From: Sukadev Bhattiprolu When checking whether a bit representing a register is set in sample_regs, a 64-bit mask, use 64-bit value (1LL). Signed-off-by: Sukadev Bhattiprolu suka...@linux.vnet.ibm.com ---

Re: arch/powerpc/math-emu/mtfsf.c - incorrect mask?

On Fri, Feb 07, 2014 at 02:49:40PM -0600, James Yang wrote: On Fri, 7 Feb 2014, Gabriel Paubert wrote: Hi Stephen, On Fri, Feb 07, 2014 at 11:27:57AM +1000, Stephen N Chivers wrote: Gabriel Paubert paub...@iram.es wrote on 02/06/2014 07:26:37 PM: From: Gabriel Paubert paub

Re: arch/powerpc/math-emu/mtfsf.c - incorrect mask?

On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 11:17:38AM +, David Laight wrote: However, your other solutions are better. mask = (FM 1); mask |= (FM 3) 0x10; mask |= (FM 6) 0x100; mask |= (FM 9) 0x1000; mask |= (FM 12) 0x1; mask |= (FM 15) 0x10;

Re: arch/powerpc/math-emu/mtfsf.c - incorrect mask?

On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 12:32:18PM +, David Laight wrote: I disagree, perhaps mostly because the compiler is not clever enough, but right now the code for solution 1 is (actually I have rewritten the code and it reads: mask = (FM 1) | ((FM 3) 0x10)

Re: arch/powerpc/math-emu/mtfsf.c - incorrect mask?

Hi James, On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 11:03:07AM -0600, James Yang wrote: [snipped] Ok, if you have measured that method1 is faster than method2, let us go for it. I believe method2 would be faster if you had a large out-of-order execution window, because more parallelism can be

Re: arch/powerpc/math-emu/mtfsf.c - incorrect mask?

Hi Stephen, On Fri, Feb 07, 2014 at 11:27:57AM +1000, Stephen N Chivers wrote: Gabriel Paubert paub...@iram.es wrote on 02/06/2014 07:26:37 PM: From: Gabriel Paubert paub...@iram.es To: Stephen N Chivers schiv...@csc.com.au Cc: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, Chris Proctor cproc

Re: arch/powerpc/math-emu/mtfsf.c - incorrect mask?

On Thu, Feb 06, 2014 at 12:09:00PM +1000, Stephen N Chivers wrote: I have a MPC8548e based board and an application that makes extensive use of floating point including numerous calls to cos. In the same program there is the use of an sqlite database. The kernel is derived from 2.6.31 and is

Re: [RFC PATCH] powerpc: add ioremap_wt

On Mon, Feb 03, 2014 at 08:16:49AM +0100, Michael Moese wrote: Allow for IO memory to be mapped cacheable for performing PCI read bursts. Signed-off-by: Michael Moese michael.mo...@men.de --- arch/powerpc/include/asm/io.h | 3 +++ arch/powerpc/mm/pgtable_32.c | 8 2 files

Re: PCIe Access - achieve bursts without DMA

On Thu, Jan 30, 2014 at 12:20:21PM +, Moese, Michael wrote: Hello PPC-developers, I'm currently trying to benchmark access speeds to our PCIe-connected IP-cores located inside our FPGA. On x86-based systems I was able to achieve bursts for both read and write access. On PPC32, using an

Re: [PATCH] powerpc: provide __bswapdi2

On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 05:09:59PM +1000, Michael Neuling wrote: David Woodhouse dw...@infradead.org wrote: From: David Woodhouse david.woodho...@intel.com Some versions of GCC apparently expect this to be provided by libgcc. Signed-off-by: David Woodhouse david.woodho...@intel.com

Re: [PATCH] powerpc: provide __bswapdi2

On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 11:38:13AM +0100, David Woodhouse wrote: On Mon, 2013-05-13 at 11:33 +0100, David Woodhouse wrote: On Mon, 2013-05-13 at 09:33 +0200, Gabriel Paubert wrote: Actually, I'd swap the two mr instructions to never have an instruction that uses the result from

Re: [PATCH 00/14] powerpc: Add support for POWER8 relocation on exceptions

On Fri, Nov 09, 2012 at 05:18:58PM +1100, Michael Neuling wrote: This set of patches adds support for taking exceptions with the MMU on which is supported by POWER8. A new set of exception vectors is added at 0xc000___4xxx. When the HW takes us here, MSR IR/DR will be set already

Re: [PATCH] powerpc: Add POWER8 architected mode to cputable

On Fri, Nov 09, 2012 at 05:26:42PM +1100, Michael Neuling wrote: A PVR of 0x0F04 means we are arch v2.07 complicate ie, POWER8. Huh? s/complicate/compliant/ ? Also ie has to be written with dots (i.e.). Gabriel Signed-off-by: Michael Neuling mi...@neuling.org diff

Re: Probing for native availability of isel from userspace

On Sun, Sep 23, 2012 at 03:46:06AM +0200, Segher Boessenkool wrote: Why does the kernel emulate this, btw? I can see emulation is useful for running older binaries, for instructions that have been removed from the architecture; but for newly added instructions, or optional instructions, it

Re: Probing for native availability of isel from userspace

On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 05:58:37PM +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: On Mon, 2012-09-24 at 09:55 +0200, Gabriel Paubert wrote: On Sun, Sep 23, 2012 at 03:46:06AM +0200, Segher Boessenkool wrote: Why does the kernel emulate this, btw? I can see emulation is useful for running older

Re: Probing for native availability of isel from userspace

On Sat, Sep 22, 2012 at 02:12:42PM +0400, malc wrote: On Sat, 22 Sep 2012, Segher Boessenkool wrote: Is it possible to determine if _native_ isel is available from userspace somehow? Just try to execute one and catch the SIGILL? Unfortunately my kernel emulates ISEL for me in

Re: [PATCH 1/2] power: Define PV_POWER7P

On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 04:59:12PM -0700, Sukadev Bhattiprolu wrote: From: Sukadev Bhattiprolu suka...@linux.vnet.ibm.com Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2012 13:32:46 -0700 Subject: [PATCH 1/2] power: Define PV_POWER7P This change is based on the patch that Carl Love posted to LKML

Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the final tree (powerpc related)

On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 03:36:01PM +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote: On Wed, 2012-06-20 at 17:50 +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote: Hi all, After merging the final tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc allyesconfig) failed like this: powerpc64-linux-ld: arch/powerpc/net/built-in.o: In

Re: kernel panic during kernel module load (powerpc specific part)

On Tue, Jun 05, 2012 at 08:00:42AM +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: On Mon, 2012-06-04 at 13:03 +0200, Gabriel Paubert wrote: There is no conflict to the ABI. These functions are supposed to be directly reachable from whatever code section may need them. Now I have a question: how

  1   2   >