From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754328AbbATLoN (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 Jan 2015 06:44:13 -0500 Received: from smtp-out4.electric.net ([192.162.216.181]:54944 "EHLO smtp-out4.electric.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753748AbbATLoL (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 Jan 2015 06:44:11 -0500 From: David Laight To: "'leroy christophe'" , Benjamin Herrenschmidt , Paul Mackerras , "Michael Ellerman" , "scottwood@freescale.com" CC: "linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" Subject: RE: [PATCH v2 07/11] powerpc/8xx: macro for handling CPU15 errata Thread-Topic: [PATCH v2 07/11] powerpc/8xx: macro for handling CPU15 errata Thread-Index: AQHQNJjRMWEAMW5jYkWhruJEX7vwspzI2I/ggAAH1oCAAAItgA== Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2015 11:43:16 +0000 Message-ID: <063D6719AE5E284EB5DD2968C1650D6D1CACF0E4@AcuExch.aculab.com> References: <20150120095735.A55671A5E86@localhost.localdomain> <063D6719AE5E284EB5DD2968C1650D6D1CACEFD9@AcuExch.aculab.com> <54BE3CD7.4040208@c-s.fr> In-Reply-To: <54BE3CD7.4040208@c-s.fr> Accept-Language: en-GB, en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.202.99.200] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Outbound-IP: 213.249.233.130 X-Env-From: David.Laight@ACULAB.COM X-PolicySMART: 3396946, 3397078 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from base64 to 8bit by nfs id t0KBiIhv011372 From: leroy > Le 20/01/2015 12:09, David Laight a écrit : > > From Christophe Leroy > >> Having a macro will help keep clear code. > > It might remove an #if but it doesn't really help. > > All it means is that anyone reading the code has to hunt for > > the definition before proceeding. > > > > Some comment about what (and why) the extra code is needed > > might help. > The main reason is because of patch 09/11 where we have to duplicate > this code. I prefer to just duplicate one line rather than duplicate the > whole code (especially because in v1 of the PATCHset, it was duplicated > twice): > > - DO_8xx_CPU15(r11, r10) > [...] > #ifdef CONFIG_MODULES > [...] > + DO_8xx_CPU15(r10, r11) > [...] > +#else > + mfspr r10, SPRN_SRR0 /* Get effective address of fault */ > + DO_8xx_CPU15(r11, r10) > > Is this approach wrong ? I'd call it something that infers 'invalidate adjacent pages' and then mention that this is needed due to a cpu errata. David {.n++%ݶw{.n+{G{ayʇڙ,jfhz_(階ݢj"mG?&~iOzv^m ?I