On Fri, 17 Aug 2018 14:51:47 +0530
Mahesh J Salgaonkar <mah...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> From: Mahesh Salgaonkar <mah...@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
>
> With the powrpc next commit e7e81847478 (poewrpc/mce: Fix SLB rebolting
> during MCE recovery path.), the SLB error recovery is broken. The
> commit missed a crucial change of OR-ing index value to RB[52-63] which
> selects the SLB entry while rebolting. This patch fixes that.
>
> Signed-off-by: Mahesh Salgaonkar <mah...@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> Reviewed-by: Nicholas Piggin <npig...@gmail.com>
> ---
> arch/powerpc/mm/slb.c | 5 ++++-
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/mm/slb.c b/arch/powerpc/mm/slb.c
> index 0b095fa54049..6dd9913425bc 100644
> --- a/arch/powerpc/mm/slb.c
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/mm/slb.c
> @@ -101,9 +101,12 @@ void __slb_restore_bolted_realmode(void)
>
> /* No isync needed because realmode. */
> for (index = 0; index < SLB_NUM_BOLTED; index++) {
> + unsigned long rb = be64_to_cpu(p->save_area[index].esid);
> +
> + rb = (rb & ~0xFFFul) | index;
> asm volatile("slbmte %0,%1" :
> : "r" (be64_to_cpu(p->save_area[index].vsid)),
> - "r" (be64_to_cpu(p->save_area[index].esid)));
> + "r" (rb));
> }
> }
>
>
I'm just looking at this again. The bolted save areas do have the
index field set. So for the OS, your patch should be equivalent to
this, right?
static inline void slb_shadow_clear(enum slb_index index)
{
- WRITE_ONCE(get_slb_shadow()->save_area[index].esid, 0);
+ WRITE_ONCE(get_slb_shadow()->save_area[index].esid, index);
}
Which seems like a better fix.
PAPR says:
Note: SLB is filled sequentially starting at index 0
from the shadow buffer ignoring the contents of
RB field bits 52-63
So that shouldn't be an issue.
Thanks,
Nick
