On Fri, 2009-03-20 at 12:33 -0700, davidastro wrote: > Hi Ben: > > I was wondering if you have any change to look into and test the propose fix > I suggested in my previous post. > I'd like to know if the fix is correct.
Sorry, I haven't had a chance yet. I will asap. Ben. > Thanks for your attention, > > > Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > > > > On Tue, 2009-03-17 at 14:15 -0700, davidastro wrote: > >> I found a bug when using the function __div64_32 in assembly in a 32 bit > >> ppc > >> architecture unit. > >> > >> I tried the numbers 55834565048000000 for the dividend and 4294967079 for > >> the divisor. When passing these two numbers to the function __div64_32, > >> I > >> had a software lock. I searched for possible patches online and in > >> different > >> forums but I could not find anything related to the assembly > >> implementation > >> to this function (I would have to apologize if somebody already found a > >> fix > >> :-) ). > >> > >> Anyway, when analyzing the assembly code, I found out with gdb the > >> problem. > >> I am not an expert in ppc architecture but I read the documentation and I > >> am > >> pretty sure I solved the issue (I have been testing for couple of days > >> using > >> random 64 to 32 number combinations with good results). > >> > >> Who or Where should I post the fix to be reviewed. > > > > Here is fine :-) > > > > Ben. > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Linuxppc-dev mailing list > > Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org > > https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev > > > > > _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
