From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751574AbbJGJNh (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 Oct 2015 05:13:37 -0400 Received: from ozlabs.org ([103.22.144.67]:38993 "EHLO ozlabs.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751259AbbJGJNd (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 Oct 2015 05:13:33 -0400 Message-ID: <1444209210.19375.1.camel@ellerman.id.au> Subject: Re: Missing operand for tlbie instruction on Power7 From: Michael Ellerman To: Segher Boessenkool Cc: Laura Abbott , Paul Mackerras , "linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org" , Linux Kernel Mailing List Date: Wed, 07 Oct 2015 20:13:30 +1100 In-Reply-To: <20151007071911.GA31002@gate.crashing.org> References: <560EA623.1040300@redhat.com> <1444102518.16909.3.camel@ellerman.id.au> <56141237.2040403@redhat.com> <1444197649.6794.7.camel@ellerman.id.au> <20151007071911.GA31002@gate.crashing.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.12.11-0ubuntu3 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 2015-10-07 at 02:19 -0500, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > On Wed, Oct 07, 2015 at 05:00:49PM +1100, Michael Ellerman wrote: > > > It's also worth noting that the __flush_power7 uses tlbiel instead of tlbie. > > > > Yeah that's a good point. It's not clear if the swsusp code wants to a local or > > a global invalidate. > > If I read the code right, this is called on the boot CPU when all the > non-boot CPUs are still (potentially) down, so if you would do a global > invalidate the non-boot CPUs might not even notice, so those need to do > a (local) invalidate after being brought up anyway? Or they probably > need it before being brought down at all? You figure it out, it makes > my brain hurt :-) A good rule would be that every cpu does a local invalidate before turning on the MMU. That would work for this case and also for kexec, kdump, junk left by firmare etc. But I don't think we do that consistently in a way that works for this code at the moment. > > As an alternative, can you try adding a .machine push / .machine "power4" / > > .machine pop, around the tlbie. That should tell the assembler to drop back to > > power4 mode for that instruction, which should then do the right thing. There > > are some examples in that file. > > That will get the assembler to not complain, but it will assemble the wrong > instruction: the power7 instruction has the same opcode (but different > semantics). So if you assemble a "tlbie r4" in power4 mode, a newer CPU > will see it as a "tlbie r4,r0" and do the wrong thing. Yeah, it would basically maintain the existing behaviour which is wrong but a known quantity. I suspect no one has ever run this on Power7 or in fact anything other than G5 or Book3E. cheers