> > > > This isn't the way to do this. We normally add entries in > > cputable.c an add a new cpu_feature_bit for the errata. > > > > Than above we'd do: > > > > if (cur_cpu_spec->cpu_features & CPU_FTR_E500_A005_ERRATUM) > > > > > > IMHO, a cpu erratum is not a cpu feature. > See there're only 32 bits can be used for all PowerPC platform to represent > cpu feature, > then is it worth consuming one of them to represent one e500 erratum?
This is an interesting debate :-) We have used cpu_features for errata in the past. However, we are getting a bit short and I'd rather keep CPU features for things that are spread out in multiple places and/or hitting hot code path. If the workaround is very limited to a single non-critical code path, testing the PVR might actually be a nicer way to do it. Now, this specific patch is ... hrm ... hard to decide. I don't like that much the global variable. On the other hand, it's static and allows the whole business of this errata to be completely local to the math_efp.c file which is a good thing. So I'm tempted to say go with the patch as it-is, but I'll let Kumar ultimately decide. Cheers, Ben. _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev