lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2022]   [Aug]   [2]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: Regression: Linux v5.15+ does not boot on Freescale P2020
Date


Le 26/07/2022 à 15:44, Segher Boessenkool a écrit :
> On Tue, Jul 26, 2022 at 11:02:59AM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>> On Tue, Jul 26, 2022 at 10:34 AM Pali Rohár <pali@kernel.org> wrote:
>>> On Monday 25 July 2022 16:54:16 Segher Boessenkool wrote:
>>>> The EH field in larx insns is new since ISA 2.05, and some ISA 1.x cpu
>>>> implementations actually raise an illegal insn exception on EH=1. It
>>>> appears P2020 is one of those.
>>>
>>> P2020 has e500 cores. e500 cores uses ISA 2.03. So this may be reason.
>>> But in official Freescale/NXP documentation for e500 is documented that
>>> lwarx supports also eh=1. Maybe it is not really supported.
>>> https://www.nxp.com/files-static/32bit/doc/ref_manual/EREF_RM.pdf (page 562)
>
> (page 6-186)
>
>>> At least there is NOTE:
>>> Some older processors may treat EH=1 as an illegal instruction.
>
> And the architecture says
> Programming Note
> Warning: On some processors that comply with versions of the
> architecture that precede Version 2.00, executing a Load And Reserve
> instruction in which EH = 1 will cause the illegal instruction error
> handler to be invoked.
>
>> In commit d6ccb1f55ddf ("powerpc/85xx: Make sure lwarx hint isn't set on ppc32")
>> this was clarified to affect (all?) e500v1/v2,
>
> e500v1/v2 based chips will treat any reserved field being set in an
> opcode as illegal.
>
> while the architecture says
>
> Reserved fields in instructions are ignored by the processor.
>
> Whoops :-) We need fixes for processor implementation bugs all the
> time of course, but this is a massive *design* bug. I'm surprised this
> CPU still works as well as it does!

"Programming Environments Manual for 32-Bit Implementations of the
PowerPC™ Architecture" §4.1.2.2.2 says: "Invalid forms result when a bit
or operand is coded incorrectly, for example, or when a reserved bit
(shown as ‘0’) is coded as ‘1’."

>
> Even the venerable PEM (last updated in 1997) shows the EH field as
> reserved, always treated as 0.
>
>> this one apparently
>> fixed it before,
>> but Christophe's commit effectively reverted that change.
>>
>> I think only the simple_spinlock.h file actually uses EH=1
>
> That's right afaics.
>
>> and this is not
>> included in non-SMP kernels, so presumably the only affected machines were
>> the rare dual-core e500v2 ones (p2020, MPC8572, bsc9132), which would
>> explain why nobody noticed for the past 9 months.
>
> Also people using an SMP kernel on older cores should see the problem,
> no? Or is that patched out? Or does this use case never happen :-)

Maybe unlike e500, older cores ignore the EH bit and don't mind when
it's set to 1 ?

Chritophe
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2022-08-02 08:48    [W:0.534 / U:0.104 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site