Le 09/12/2019 à 11:53, Michael Ellerman a écrit :
Segher Boessenkool writes:
On Sat, Dec 07, 2019 at 10:42:28AM +0100, Christophe Leroy wrote:
Le 06/12/2019 à 21:59, Segher Boessenkool a écrit :
If the compiler can see the callee wants the same TOC as the caller has,
it does not arrange to
Segher Boessenkool writes:
> On Sat, Dec 07, 2019 at 10:42:28AM +0100, Christophe Leroy wrote:
>> Le 06/12/2019 à 21:59, Segher Boessenkool a écrit :
>> >If the compiler can see the callee wants the same TOC as the caller has,
>> >it does not arrange to set (and restore) it, no. If it sees it may
On Sat, Dec 07, 2019 at 10:42:28AM +0100, Christophe Leroy wrote:
> Le 06/12/2019 à 21:59, Segher Boessenkool a écrit :
> >If the compiler can see the callee wants the same TOC as the caller has,
> >it does not arrange to set (and restore) it, no. If it sees it may be
> >different, it does arrange
Le 06/12/2019 à 21:59, Segher Boessenkool a écrit :
On Wed, Dec 04, 2019 at 05:32:54AM +0100, Christophe Leroy wrote:
Le 29/11/2019 à 19:46, Segher Boessenkool a écrit :
The existing call_do_irq isn't C code. It doesn't do anything with r2,
as far as I can see; __do_irq just gets whatever t
On Wed, Dec 04, 2019 at 05:32:54AM +0100, Christophe Leroy wrote:
> Le 29/11/2019 à 19:46, Segher Boessenkool a écrit :
> >The existing call_do_irq isn't C code. It doesn't do anything with r2,
> >as far as I can see; __do_irq just gets whatever the caller of call_do_irq
> >has.
> >
> >So I guess
Hi,
Le 29/11/2019 à 19:46, Segher Boessenkool a écrit :
Hi!
On Wed, Nov 27, 2019 at 04:15:15PM +0100, Christophe Leroy wrote:
Le 27/11/2019 à 15:59, Segher Boessenkool a écrit :
On Wed, Nov 27, 2019 at 02:50:30PM +0100, Christophe Leroy wrote:
So what do we do ? We just drop the "r2" clobber
Hi!
On Wed, Nov 27, 2019 at 04:15:15PM +0100, Christophe Leroy wrote:
> Le 27/11/2019 à 15:59, Segher Boessenkool a écrit :
> >On Wed, Nov 27, 2019 at 02:50:30PM +0100, Christophe Leroy wrote:
> >>So what do we do ? We just drop the "r2" clobber ?
> >
> >You have to make sure your asm code works f
Le 27/11/2019 à 15:59, Segher Boessenkool a écrit :
On Wed, Nov 27, 2019 at 02:50:30PM +0100, Christophe Leroy wrote:
So what do we do ? We just drop the "r2" clobber ?
You have to make sure your asm code works for all ABIs. This is quite
involved if you do a call to an external function.
On Wed, Nov 27, 2019 at 02:50:30PM +0100, Christophe Leroy wrote:
> So what do we do ? We just drop the "r2" clobber ?
You have to make sure your asm code works for all ABIs. This is quite
involved if you do a call to an external function. The compiler does
*not* see this call, so you will have
Le 25/11/2019 à 15:25, Segher Boessenkool a écrit :
On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 09:32:23PM +1100, Michael Ellerman wrote:
Segher Boessenkool writes:
+static inline void call_do_irq(struct pt_regs *regs, void *sp)
+{
+ register unsigned long r3 asm("r3") = (unsigned long)regs;
+
+ /*
On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 09:32:23PM +1100, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> Segher Boessenkool writes:
> >> > +static inline void call_do_irq(struct pt_regs *regs, void *sp)
> >> > +{
> >> > +register unsigned long r3 asm("r3") = (unsigned long)regs;
> >> > +
> >> > +/* Temporarily switch
Segher Boessenkool writes:
> On Thu, Nov 21, 2019 at 05:14:45PM +1100, Michael Ellerman wrote:
>> Christophe Leroy writes:
>> That breaks 64-bit with GCC9:
>>
>> arch/powerpc/kernel/irq.c: In function 'do_IRQ':
>> arch/powerpc/kernel/irq.c:650:2: error: PIC register clobbered by 'r2' in
>>
On Thu, Nov 21, 2019 at 05:14:45PM +1100, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> Christophe Leroy writes:
> That breaks 64-bit with GCC9:
>
> arch/powerpc/kernel/irq.c: In function 'do_IRQ':
> arch/powerpc/kernel/irq.c:650:2: error: PIC register clobbered by 'r2' in
> 'asm'
> 650 | asm volatile(
>
Christophe Leroy writes:
> call_do_irq() and call_do_softirq() are quite similar on PPC32 and
> PPC64 and are simple enough to be worth inlining.
>
> Inlining them avoids an mflr/mtlr pair plus a save/reload on stack.
>
> This is inspired from S390 arch. Several other arches do more or
> less the
call_do_irq() and call_do_softirq() are quite similar on PPC32 and
PPC64 and are simple enough to be worth inlining.
Inlining them avoids an mflr/mtlr pair plus a save/reload on stack.
This is inspired from S390 arch. Several other arches do more or
less the same. The way sparc arch does seems od
15 matches
Mail list logo
