lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2010]   [Nov]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRE: [PATCH 3/4][v2] fsl_rio: move machine_check handler into machine_check_e500 & machine_check_e500mc
Date
From



Best Regards,
Shaohui Xie


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bounine, Alexandre [mailto:Alexandre.Bounine@idt.com]
> Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2010 6:55 AM
> To: Xie Shaohui-B21989; akpm@linux-foundation.org
> Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org; Li
Yang-
> R58472; Gala Kumar-B11780; Zang Roy-R61911
> Subject: RE: [PATCH 3/4][v2] fsl_rio: move machine_check handler into
> machine_check_e500 & machine_check_e500mc
>
> Shaohui Xie <b21989@freescale.com> wrote:
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kernel/traps.c
b/arch/powerpc/kernel/traps.c
> > index a45a63c..2a5fb9d 100644
> > --- a/arch/powerpc/kernel/traps.c
> > +++ b/arch/powerpc/kernel/traps.c
> > @@ -55,6 +55,7 @@
> > #endif
> > #include <asm/kexec.h>
> > #include <asm/ppc-opcode.h>
> > +#include <linux/rio.h>
> >
> > #if defined(CONFIG_DEBUGGER) || defined(CONFIG_KEXEC) int
> > (*__debugger)(struct pt_regs *regs) __read_mostly; @@ -500,6 +501,13
> > @@ int machine_check_e500mc(struct pt_regs *regs)
> > reason & MCSR_MEA ? "Effective" : "Physical",
> addr);
> > }
> >
> > + if (reason & MCSR_BUS_RBERR) {
> > + printk("Bus - Read Data Bus Error\n"); #ifdef
CONFIG_RAPIDIO
> > + recoverable = fsl_rio_mcheck_exception(regs); #endif
> > + }
> > +
> > mtspr(SPRN_MCSR, mcsr);
> > return mfspr(SPRN_MCSR) == 0 && recoverable; } @@ -527,8
+535,12
> @@
> > int machine_check_e500(struct pt_regs *regs)
> > printk("Bus - Write Address Error\n");
> > if (reason & MCSR_BUS_IBERR)
> > printk("Bus - Instruction Data Error\n");
> > - if (reason & MCSR_BUS_RBERR)
> > + if (reason & MCSR_BUS_RBERR) {
> > printk("Bus - Read Data Bus Error\n");
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_RAPIDIO
> > + fsl_rio_mcheck_exception(regs);
> > +#endif
> > + }
> > if (reason & MCSR_BUS_WBERR)
> > printk("Bus - Read Data Bus Error\n");
> > if (reason & MCSR_BUS_IPERR)
>
> This implementation breaks an intended use of
> fsl_rio_mcheck_exception():
> 1. for e500 it does not check the return value of the rio handler and
> crashes the system even after RIO Mchk was serviced. Looks like e500mc
> version handles it better but I have no HW to test it.
> 2. the RIO Mchk is expected to be handled quietly but here it has many
> printk's. May be it is better to call the fsl_rio_mcheck_exception()
> handler in very beginning and simply exit if it returns 1.
>
> Alex.
[Xie Shaohui-B21989] Hi Alex, seems your suggestion is some kind of
conflict with Kumar, you can have a look at
http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/67774/

Thanks
Shaohui

>
>




\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2010-11-11 11:21    [W:1.448 / U:0.016 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site