Re: [PATCH] kdb: use correct pointer when 'btc' calls 'btt'

2018-09-16 Thread Daniel Thompson
On Fri, Sep 14, 2018 at 12:35:44PM +, Christophe Leroy wrote: > On a powerpc 8xx, 'btc' fails as follows: > > Entering kdb (current=0x(ptrval), pid 282) due to Keyboard Entry > kdb> btc > btc: cpu status: Currently on cpu 0 > Available cpus: 0 > kdb_getarea: Bad address 0x0 > > when booting t

Re: [PATCH] powerpc/tm: Fix HFSCR bit for no suspend case

2018-09-16 Thread Breno Leitao
On 09/11/2018 12:07 AM, Michael Neuling wrote: > Currently on P9N DD2.1 we end up taking infinite TM facility > unavailable exceptions on the first TM usage by userspace. > > In the special case of TM no suspend (P9N DD2.1), Linux is told TM is > off via CPU dt-ftrs but told to (partially) use it

Re: [PATCH] kdb: use correct pointer when 'btc' calls 'btt'

2018-09-16 Thread Tobin C. Harding
On Sun, Sep 16, 2018 at 12:06:10PM -0700, Daniel Thompson wrote: > On Fri, Sep 14, 2018 at 12:35:44PM +, Christophe Leroy wrote: > > On a powerpc 8xx, 'btc' fails as follows: > > > > Entering kdb (current=0x(ptrval), pid 282) due to Keyboard Entry > > kdb> btc > > btc: cpu status: Currently on

Re: [PATCH 03/12] powerpc/64s/hash: move POWER5 < DD2.1 slbie workaround where it is needed

2018-09-16 Thread kbuild test robot
Hi Nicholas, I love your patch! Yet something to improve: [auto build test ERROR on powerpc/next] [also build test ERROR on v4.19-rc3 next-20180913] [if your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, please drop us a note to help improve the system] url: https://github.com/0day-ci/linux/commi

Re: [PATCH 1/3] powerpc: remove old GCC version checks

2018-09-16 Thread Joel Stanley
On Fri, 14 Sep 2018 at 14:39, Nicholas Piggin wrote: > > GCC 4.6 is the minimum supported now. > > Signed-off-by: Nicholas Piggin Reviewed-by: Joel Stanley

Re: [PATCH 2/3] powerpc: consolidate -mno-sched-epilog into FTRACE flags

2018-09-16 Thread Joel Stanley
On Fri, 14 Sep 2018 at 14:39, Nicholas Piggin wrote: > > Signed-off-by: Nicholas Piggin Reviewed-by: Joel Stanley

Re: [PATCH 3/3] powerpc: avoid -mno-sched-epilog on GCC 4.9 and newer

2018-09-16 Thread Joel Stanley
On Fri, 14 Sep 2018 at 14:39, Nicholas Piggin wrote: > > Signed-off-by: Nicholas Piggin Reviewed-by: Joel Stanley I gave this a spin with clang trunk on the powernv kernel and it did the trick. Thanks! mpe, this series supersedes [v2,5/5] powerpc: Remove -mno-sched-epilog (https://patchwork.o

Re: [PATCH 1/2] powerpc/prom: Remove VLA in prom_check_platform_support()

2018-09-16 Thread Joel Stanley
On Wed, 5 Sep 2018 at 11:40, Suraj Jitindar Singh wrote: > > In prom_check_platform_support() we retrieve and parse the > "ibm,arch-vec-5-platform-support" property of the chosen node. > Currently we use a variable length array however to avoid this use an > array of constant length 8. > > This pr

Re: [PATCH 2/2] powerpc/pseries: Remove VLA from lparcfg_write()

2018-09-16 Thread Joel Stanley
On Wed, 5 Sep 2018 at 11:40, Suraj Jitindar Singh wrote: > > In lparcfg_write we hard code kbuf_sz and then use this as the variable > length of kbuf creating a variable length array. Since we're hard coding > the length anyway just define the array using this as the length and > remove the need f

Re: [RFC PATCH 00/11] New TM Model

2018-09-16 Thread Michael Neuling
On Wed, 2018-09-12 at 16:40 -0300, Breno Leitao wrote: > This patchset for the hardware transactional memory (TM) subsystem aims to > avoid spending a lot of time on TM suspended mode in kernel space. It > basically > changes where the reclaim/recheckpoint will be executed. > > Once a CPU enters i

Re: [RFC PATCH 05/11] powerpc/tm: Function that updates the failure code

2018-09-16 Thread Michael Neuling
This series is not bisectable because this patch fails with: arch/powerpc/kernel/process.c:993:13: error: ‘tm_fix_failure_cause’ defined but not used [-Werror=unused-function] static void tm_fix_failure_cause(struct task_struct *task, uint8_t cause) ^ cc1: all warnings being treated

Re: [PATCH 03/12] powerpc/64s/hash: move POWER5 < DD2.1 slbie workaround where it is needed

2018-09-16 Thread Aneesh Kumar K.V
Nicholas Piggin writes: > The POWER5 < DD2.1 issue is that slbie needs to be issued more than > once. It came in with this change: > > ChangeSet@1.1608, 2004-04-29 07:12:31-07:00, da...@gibson.dropbear.id.au > [PATCH] POWER5 erratum workaround > > Early POWER5 revisions ( instructions to be

Re: [PATCH 05/12] powerpc/64s/hash: Use POWER6 SLBIA IH=1 variant in switch_slb

2018-09-16 Thread Aneesh Kumar K.V
Nicholas Piggin writes: > The SLBIA IH=1 hint will remove all non-zero SLBEs, but only > invalidate ERAT entries associated with a class value of 1, for > processors that support the hint (e.g., POWER6 and newer), which > Linux assigns to user addresses. > > This prevents kernel ERAT entries from

[PATCH v3 1/3] watchdog: mpc8xxx: use dev_xxxx() instead of pr_xxxx()

2018-09-16 Thread Christophe Leroy
mpc8xxx watchdog driver is a platform device drivers, it is therefore possible to use dev_xxx() messaging rather than pr_xxx() Reviewed-by: Guenter Roeck Signed-off-by: Christophe Leroy --- drivers/watchdog/mpc8xxx_wdt.c | 24 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 12 deleti

[PATCH v3 2/3] watchdog: mpc8xxx: provide boot status

2018-09-16 Thread Christophe Leroy
mpc8xxx watchdog driver supports the following platforms: - mpc8xx - mpc83xx - mpc86xx Those three platforms have a 32 bits register which provides the reason of the last boot, including whether it was caused by the watchdog. mpc8xx: Register RSR, bit SWRS (bit 3) mpc83xx: Register RSR, bit SWRS

[PATCH v3 3/3] dt-bindings: watchdog: add mpc8xxx-wdt support

2018-09-16 Thread Christophe Leroy
Add description of DT bindings for mpc8xxx-wdt driver which handles the CPU watchdog timer on the mpc83xx, mpc86xx and mpc8xx. Signed-off-by: Christophe Leroy --- .../devicetree/bindings/watchdog/mpc8xxx-wdt.txt | 25 ++ 1 file changed, 25 insertions(+) create mode 100644

Re: [PATCH 01/12] powerpc/64s/hash: Fix stab_rr off by one initialization

2018-09-16 Thread Joel Stanley
On Sat, 15 Sep 2018 at 01:03, Nicholas Piggin wrote: > > This causes SLB alloation to start 1 beyond the start of the SLB. > There is no real problem because after it wraps it stats behaving starts? > properly, it's just surprisig to see when looking at SLB traces. surprising > > Signed-off-by