On 12/09/14 18:23, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 06:19:08PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
>> On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 06:14:04PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
>>> On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 12:31:14PM +0100, Daniel Thompson wrote:
This patch introduces
On Sun, Sep 14, 2014 at 07:36:31AM +0100, Daniel Thompson wrote:
> > - if (!relinquish)
> > + if (!relinquish) {
> > + /* Restore default handler and registers */
> > + local_fiq_disable();
> > + set_fiq_regs(&dfl_fiq_regs);
>
> This variable was declared as def_f
On 12/09/14 18:23, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 06:19:08PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
>> On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 06:14:04PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
>>> On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 12:31:14PM +0100, Daniel Thompson wrote:
This patch introduces
On 12/09/14 18:14, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 12:31:14PM +0100, Daniel Thompson wrote:
>> This patch introduces a new default FIQ handler that is structured in a
>> similar way to the existing ARM exception handler and result in the FIQ
>> being handled by C code runn
On 12/09/14 18:03, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 12:31:14PM +0100, Daniel Thompson wrote:
>> -.macro svc_entry, stack_hole=0
>> +.macro svc_entry, stack_hole=0, call_trace=1
>> UNWIND(.fnstart)
>> UNWIND(.save {r0 - pc} )
>> sub
On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 06:19:08PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 06:14:04PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 12:31:14PM +0100, Daniel Thompson wrote:
> > > This patch introduces a new default FIQ handler that is structured in a
>
On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 06:14:04PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 12:31:14PM +0100, Daniel Thompson wrote:
> > This patch introduces a new default FIQ handler that is structured in a
> > similar way to the existing ARM exception handler and result in the FIQ
> > be
On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 12:31:14PM +0100, Daniel Thompson wrote:
> This patch introduces a new default FIQ handler that is structured in a
> similar way to the existing ARM exception handler and result in the FIQ
> being handled by C code running on the SVC stack (despite this code run
> in the FIQ
And another thing...
On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 12:31:14PM +0100, Daniel Thompson wrote:
> + .align 5
> +__fiq_abt:
> + svc_entry 0, 0
Right, so this function is called __fiq_abt.
...
> + svc_exit_via_fiq
> + UNWIND(.fnend )
> +ENDPROC(__fiq_svc)
Or is it called __fiq_svc
On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 06:03:07PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 12:31:14PM +0100, Daniel Thompson wrote:
> > - .macro svc_entry, stack_hole=0
> > + .macro svc_entry, stack_hole=0, call_trace=1
> > UNWIND(.fnstart )
> > UNWIND(.save {r0 - pc}
On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 12:31:14PM +0100, Daniel Thompson wrote:
> - .macro svc_entry, stack_hole=0
> + .macro svc_entry, stack_hole=0, call_trace=1
> UNWIND(.fnstart )
> UNWIND(.save {r0 - pc} )
> sub sp, sp, #(S_FRAME_SIZE + \stack_hole - 4)
> @@ -
This patch introduces a new default FIQ handler that is structured in a
similar way to the existing ARM exception handler and result in the FIQ
being handled by C code running on the SVC stack (despite this code run
in the FIQ handler is subject to severe limitations with respect to
locking making
12 matches
Mail list logo
