On 05/06/2014 04:12 PM, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote:
Alexander Graf <ag...@suse.de> writes:
On 06.05.14 02:41, Paul Mackerras wrote:
On Mon, May 05, 2014 at 01:19:30PM +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
On 05/04/2014 07:21 PM, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote:
+#ifdef CONFIG_PPC_BOOK3S_64
+ return vcpu->arch.fault_dar;
How about PA6T and G5s?
G5 sets DAR on an alignment interrupt.
As for PA6T, I don't know for sure, but if it doesn't, ordinary
alignment interrupts wouldn't be handled properly, since the code in
arch/powerpc/kernel/align.c assumes DAR contains the address being
accessed on all PowerPC CPUs.
Now that's a good point. If we simply behave like Linux, I'm fine. This
definitely deserves a comment on the #ifdef in the code.
How about ?
#ifdef CONFIG_PPC_BOOK3S_64
/*
* Linux always expect a valid dar as per alignment
* interrupt handling code (fix_alignment()). Don't compute the dar
* value here, instead used the saved dar value. Right now we restrict
* this only for BOOK3S-64.
*/
/* Linux's fix_alignment() assumes that DAR is valid, so can we */
Alex
return vcpu->arch.fault_dar;
#else
-aneesh
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm-ppc" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
