* [PATCH] powerpc: fix building after binutils changes.
@ 2022-01-23 13:43 Mike
2022-01-23 14:18 ` Mike
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Mike @ 2022-01-23 13:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: open list:LINUX FOR POWERPC...
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1673 bytes --]
As some have probably noticed, we are seeing errors like ' Error:
unrecognized opcode: `ptesync'' 'dssall' and 'stbcix' as a result of
binutils changes, making compiling all that more fun again. The only
question on my mind still is this:
----
diff --git a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/io.h b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/io.h
index beba4979bff939..d3a9c91cd06a8b 100644
--- a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/io.h
+++ b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/io.h
@@ -334,7 +334,7 @@ static inline void __raw_writel(unsigned int v,
volatile void __iomem *addr)
}
#define __raw_writel __raw_writel
-#ifdef __powerpc64__
+#ifdef CONFIG_PPC64
static inline unsigned long __raw_readq(const volatile void __iomem *addr)
{
return *(volatile unsigned long __force *)PCI_FIX_ADDR(addr);
@@ -352,7 +352,8 @@ static inline void __raw_writeq_be(unsigned long
v, volatile void __iomem *addr)
__raw_writeq((__force unsigned long)cpu_to_be64(v), addr);
}
#define __raw_writeq_be __raw_writeq_be
-
+#endif
+#ifdef CONFIG_POWER6_CPU
/*
* Real mode versions of the above. Those instructions are only supposed
* to be used in hypervisor real mode as per the architecture spec.
@@ -417,7 +418,7 @@ static inline u64 __raw_rm_readq(volatile void
__iomem *paddr)
: "=r" (ret) : "r" (paddr) : "memory");
return ret;
}
-#endif /* __powerpc64__ */
+#endif /* CONFIG_POWER6_CPU */
---
Will there come a mail saying this broke the PPC6'ish based CPU
someone made in their garage? And lwesync is a valid PPC32
instruction, should i just follow the example above where
BARRIER_LWESYNC is PPC64 only?
https://github.com/threader/linux/commits/master-build-ppc - linux-next
Best regards.
Michael Heltne
[-- Attachment #2: threader_ppc_build-0.patch --]
[-- Type: text/x-patch, Size: 3805 bytes --]
From 226efa05733457bb5c483f30aab6d5c6a304422c Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: threader <michael.heltne@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2022 14:17:10 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] arch: powerpc: fix building after binutils changes. 'dssall'
in mmu_context.c is an altivec instruction, build that accordingly. 'ptesync'
is a PPC64 instruction, so dont go there for if not. And apparently ifdef
__powerpc64__ isnt enough in all configurations and 'stbcix' and friends, all
POWER6 instructions hopefully not needed by CONFIG_PPC64 in general, wanted
to play.
Signed-off-by: Micahel B Heltne <michael.heltne@gmail.com>
---
arch/powerpc/include/asm/io.h | 7 ++++---
arch/powerpc/lib/sstep.c | 4 +++-
arch/powerpc/mm/Makefile | 3 +++
arch/powerpc/mm/pageattr.c | 4 ++--
4 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/io.h b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/io.h
index beba4979bff939..d3a9c91cd06a8b 100644
--- a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/io.h
+++ b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/io.h
@@ -334,7 +334,7 @@ static inline void __raw_writel(unsigned int v, volatile void __iomem *addr)
}
#define __raw_writel __raw_writel
-#ifdef __powerpc64__
+#ifdef CONFIG_PPC64
static inline unsigned long __raw_readq(const volatile void __iomem *addr)
{
return *(volatile unsigned long __force *)PCI_FIX_ADDR(addr);
@@ -352,7 +352,8 @@ static inline void __raw_writeq_be(unsigned long v, volatile void __iomem *addr)
__raw_writeq((__force unsigned long)cpu_to_be64(v), addr);
}
#define __raw_writeq_be __raw_writeq_be
-
+#endif
+#ifdef CONFIG_POWER6_CPU
/*
* Real mode versions of the above. Those instructions are only supposed
* to be used in hypervisor real mode as per the architecture spec.
@@ -417,7 +418,7 @@ static inline u64 __raw_rm_readq(volatile void __iomem *paddr)
: "=r" (ret) : "r" (paddr) : "memory");
return ret;
}
-#endif /* __powerpc64__ */
+#endif /* CONFIG_POWER6_CPU */
/*
*
diff --git a/arch/powerpc/lib/sstep.c b/arch/powerpc/lib/sstep.c
index a94b0cd0bdc5ca..4ffd6791b03ec0 100644
--- a/arch/powerpc/lib/sstep.c
+++ b/arch/powerpc/lib/sstep.c
@@ -1465,7 +1465,7 @@ int analyse_instr(struct instruction_op *op, const struct pt_regs *regs,
switch ((word >> 1) & 0x3ff) {
case 598: /* sync */
op->type = BARRIER + BARRIER_SYNC;
-#ifdef __powerpc64__
+#ifdef CONFIG_PPC64
switch ((word >> 21) & 3) {
case 1: /* lwsync */
op->type = BARRIER + BARRIER_LWSYNC;
@@ -3267,9 +3267,11 @@ void emulate_update_regs(struct pt_regs *regs, struct instruction_op *op)
case BARRIER_LWSYNC:
asm volatile("lwsync" : : : "memory");
break;
+#ifdef CONFIG_PPC64
case BARRIER_PTESYNC:
asm volatile("ptesync" : : : "memory");
break;
+#endif
}
break;
diff --git a/arch/powerpc/mm/Makefile b/arch/powerpc/mm/Makefile
index df8172da2301b7..2f87e77315997a 100644
--- a/arch/powerpc/mm/Makefile
+++ b/arch/powerpc/mm/Makefile
@@ -4,6 +4,9 @@
#
ccflags-$(CONFIG_PPC64) := $(NO_MINIMAL_TOC)
+ifeq ($(CONFIG_ALTIVEC),y)
+CFLAGS_mmu_context.o += $(call cc-option, -maltivec, -mabi=altivec)
+endif
obj-y := fault.o mem.o pgtable.o mmap.o maccess.o pageattr.o \
init_$(BITS).o pgtable_$(BITS).o \
diff --git a/arch/powerpc/mm/pageattr.c b/arch/powerpc/mm/pageattr.c
index edea388e9d3fbb..ccd04a386e28fc 100644
--- a/arch/powerpc/mm/pageattr.c
+++ b/arch/powerpc/mm/pageattr.c
@@ -54,11 +54,11 @@ static int change_page_attr(pte_t *ptep, unsigned long addr, void *data)
}
pte_update(&init_mm, addr, ptep, ~0UL, pte_val(pte), 0);
-
+#ifdef CONFIG_PPC64
/* See ptesync comment in radix__set_pte_at() */
if (radix_enabled())
asm volatile("ptesync": : :"memory");
-
+#endif
flush_tlb_kernel_range(addr, addr + PAGE_SIZE);
spin_unlock(&init_mm.page_table_lock);
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] powerpc: fix building after binutils changes.
2022-01-23 13:43 [PATCH] powerpc: fix building after binutils changes Mike
@ 2022-01-23 14:18 ` Mike
2022-01-23 16:56 ` Mike
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Mike @ 2022-01-23 14:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: open list:LINUX FOR POWERPC...
Maybe cite the correct parts of the patch where my questions arose for context.
---
diff --git a/arch/powerpc/lib/sstep.c b/arch/powerpc/lib/sstep.c
index a94b0cd0bdc5ca..4ffd6791b03ec0 100644
--- a/arch/powerpc/lib/sstep.c
+++ b/arch/powerpc/lib/sstep.c
@@ -1465,7 +1465,7 @@ int analyse_instr(struct instruction_op *op,
const struct pt_regs *regs,
switch ((word >> 1) & 0x3ff) {
case 598: /* sync */
op->type = BARRIER + BARRIER_SYNC;
-#ifdef __powerpc64__
+#ifdef CONFIG_PPC64
switch ((word >> 21) & 3) {
case 1: /* lwsync */
op->type = BARRIER + BARRIER_LWSYNC;
@@ -3267,9 +3267,11 @@ void emulate_update_regs(struct pt_regs *regs,
struct instruction_op *op)
case BARRIER_LWSYNC:
asm volatile("lwsync" : : : "memory");
break;
+#ifdef CONFIG_PPC64
case BARRIER_PTESYNC:
asm volatile("ptesync" : : : "memory");
break;
+#endif
}
break;
-----
On Sun, 23 Jan 2022 at 14:43, Mike <michael.heltne@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> As some have probably noticed, we are seeing errors like ' Error:
> unrecognized opcode: `ptesync'' 'dssall' and 'stbcix' as a result of
> binutils changes, making compiling all that more fun again. The only
> question on my mind still is this:
> ----
> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/io.h b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/io.h
> index beba4979bff939..d3a9c91cd06a8b 100644
> --- a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/io.h
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/io.h
> @@ -334,7 +334,7 @@ static inline void __raw_writel(unsigned int v,
> volatile void __iomem *addr)
> }
> #define __raw_writel __raw_writel
>
> -#ifdef __powerpc64__
> +#ifdef CONFIG_PPC64
> static inline unsigned long __raw_readq(const volatile void __iomem *addr)
> {
> return *(volatile unsigned long __force *)PCI_FIX_ADDR(addr);
> @@ -352,7 +352,8 @@ static inline void __raw_writeq_be(unsigned long
> v, volatile void __iomem *addr)
> __raw_writeq((__force unsigned long)cpu_to_be64(v), addr);
> }
> #define __raw_writeq_be __raw_writeq_be
> -
> +#endif
> +#ifdef CONFIG_POWER6_CPU
> /*
> * Real mode versions of the above. Those instructions are only supposed
> * to be used in hypervisor real mode as per the architecture spec.
> @@ -417,7 +418,7 @@ static inline u64 __raw_rm_readq(volatile void
> __iomem *paddr)
> : "=r" (ret) : "r" (paddr) : "memory");
> return ret;
> }
> -#endif /* __powerpc64__ */
>
> +#endif /* CONFIG_POWER6_CPU */
>
> ---
> Will there come a mail saying this broke the PPC6'ish based CPU
> someone made in their garage? And lwesync is a valid PPC32
> instruction, should i just follow the example above where
> BARRIER_LWESYNC is PPC64 only?
>
> https://github.com/threader/linux/commits/master-build-ppc - linux-next
>
> Best regards.
> Michael Heltne
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] powerpc: fix building after binutils changes.
2022-01-23 14:18 ` Mike
@ 2022-01-23 16:56 ` Mike
0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Mike @ 2022-01-23 16:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: open list:LINUX FOR POWERPC...
Now I remembered reading something from 2013 on 'lwsync',
https://gcc.gnu.org/legacy-ml/gcc-patches/2006-11/msg01238.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/legacy-ml/gcc-patches/2012-07/msg01062.html
so that would end up something like
--- a/media/thread/12fd50d6-d14c-42af-ad1d-a595e5f080cd/dev/linux-main/linux/arch/powerpc/lib/sstep.c
+++ b/home/thread/dev/linus/linux/arch/powerpc/lib/sstep.c
@@ -3265,7 +3265,11 @@ void emulate_update_regs(struct pt_regs *regs,
struct instruction_op *op)
eieio();
break;
case BARRIER_LWSYNC:
+#if defined (CONFIG_40x || CONFIG_44x || CONFIG_E500 ||
CONFIG_PPA8548 || CONFIG_TQM8548 || CONFIG_MPC8540_ADS ||
CONFIG_PPC_BOOK3S_603)
+ asm volatile("sync" : : : "memory");
+#else
asm volatile("lwsync" : : : "memory");
+#endif
break;
#ifdef CONFIG_PPC64
case BARRIER_PTESYNC:
On Sun, 23 Jan 2022 at 15:18, Mike <michael.heltne@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Maybe cite the correct parts of the patch where my questions arose for context.
> ---
> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/lib/sstep.c b/arch/powerpc/lib/sstep.c
> index a94b0cd0bdc5ca..4ffd6791b03ec0 100644
> --- a/arch/powerpc/lib/sstep.c
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/lib/sstep.c
> @@ -1465,7 +1465,7 @@ int analyse_instr(struct instruction_op *op,
> const struct pt_regs *regs,
> switch ((word >> 1) & 0x3ff) {
> case 598: /* sync */
> op->type = BARRIER + BARRIER_SYNC;
> -#ifdef __powerpc64__
> +#ifdef CONFIG_PPC64
> switch ((word >> 21) & 3) {
> case 1: /* lwsync */
> op->type = BARRIER + BARRIER_LWSYNC;
> @@ -3267,9 +3267,11 @@ void emulate_update_regs(struct pt_regs *regs,
> struct instruction_op *op)
> case BARRIER_LWSYNC:
> asm volatile("lwsync" : : : "memory");
> break;
> +#ifdef CONFIG_PPC64
> case BARRIER_PTESYNC:
> asm volatile("ptesync" : : : "memory");
> break;
> +#endif
> }
> break;
> -----
>
> On Sun, 23 Jan 2022 at 14:43, Mike <michael.heltne@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > As some have probably noticed, we are seeing errors like ' Error:
> > unrecognized opcode: `ptesync'' 'dssall' and 'stbcix' as a result of
> > binutils changes, making compiling all that more fun again. The only
> > question on my mind still is this:
> > ----
> > diff --git a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/io.h b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/io.h
> > index beba4979bff939..d3a9c91cd06a8b 100644
> > --- a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/io.h
> > +++ b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/io.h
> > @@ -334,7 +334,7 @@ static inline void __raw_writel(unsigned int v,
> > volatile void __iomem *addr)
> > }
> > #define __raw_writel __raw_writel
> >
> > -#ifdef __powerpc64__
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_PPC64
> > static inline unsigned long __raw_readq(const volatile void __iomem *addr)
> > {
> > return *(volatile unsigned long __force *)PCI_FIX_ADDR(addr);
> > @@ -352,7 +352,8 @@ static inline void __raw_writeq_be(unsigned long
> > v, volatile void __iomem *addr)
> > __raw_writeq((__force unsigned long)cpu_to_be64(v), addr);
> > }
> > #define __raw_writeq_be __raw_writeq_be
> > -
> > +#endif
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_POWER6_CPU
> > /*
> > * Real mode versions of the above. Those instructions are only supposed
> > * to be used in hypervisor real mode as per the architecture spec.
> > @@ -417,7 +418,7 @@ static inline u64 __raw_rm_readq(volatile void
> > __iomem *paddr)
> > : "=r" (ret) : "r" (paddr) : "memory");
> > return ret;
> > }
> > -#endif /* __powerpc64__ */
> >
> > +#endif /* CONFIG_POWER6_CPU */
> >
> > ---
> > Will there come a mail saying this broke the PPC6'ish based CPU
> > someone made in their garage? And lwesync is a valid PPC32
> > instruction, should i just follow the example above where
> > BARRIER_LWESYNC is PPC64 only?
> >
> > https://github.com/threader/linux/commits/master-build-ppc - linux-next
> >
> > Best regards.
> > Michael Heltne
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2022-01-23 14:55 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2022-01-23 13:43 [PATCH] powerpc: fix building after binutils changes Mike
2022-01-23 14:18 ` Mike
2022-01-23 16:56 ` Mike
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.