| Message ID | 20090723055951.7867DDDD1B@ozlabs.org (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Accepted, archived |
| Commit | 29c09e8fbaf65698c51aeffe34acc284a454a38f |
| Headers | show |
On Jul 23, 2009, at 12:59 AM, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > This adds the opcode definitions to ppc-opcode.h for the two > instructions > tlbivax and tlbsrx. as defined by Book3E 2.06 > > Signed-off-by: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org> > --- > > arch/powerpc/include/asm/ppc-opcode.h | 6 ++++++ > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+) Do we really have binutils that don't have tlbivax properly at this point? - k
On Thu, 2009-07-23 at 10:55 -0500, Kumar Gala wrote: > On Jul 23, 2009, at 12:59 AM, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > > > This adds the opcode definitions to ppc-opcode.h for the two > > instructions > > tlbivax and tlbsrx. as defined by Book3E 2.06 > > > > Signed-off-by: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org> > > --- > > > > arch/powerpc/include/asm/ppc-opcode.h | 6 ++++++ > > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+) > > Do we really have binutils that don't have tlbivax properly at this > point? I don't know for sure, I like being consistent with the rest though and so I use those macros for all those MMU opcodes. Also means that I have no problem building with my current toolchain without passing a specific -mcpu option or anything like that :-) We can change that back later if you want. Cheers, Ben.
On Jul 23, 2009, at 5:12 PM, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > On Thu, 2009-07-23 at 10:55 -0500, Kumar Gala wrote: >> On Jul 23, 2009, at 12:59 AM, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: >> >>> This adds the opcode definitions to ppc-opcode.h for the two >>> instructions >>> tlbivax and tlbsrx. as defined by Book3E 2.06 >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org> >>> --- >>> >>> arch/powerpc/include/asm/ppc-opcode.h | 6 ++++++ >>> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+) >> >> Do we really have binutils that don't have tlbivax properly at this >> point? > > I don't know for sure, I like being consistent with the rest though > and so I use those macros for all those MMU opcodes. Also means that > I have no problem building with my current toolchain without passing > a specific -mcpu option or anything like that :-) > > We can change that back later if you want. ok, just wondering.. at some point we should decide which way we want to go, since we use "tlbivax" today on e500/fsl-booke. - k
--- linux-work.orig/arch/powerpc/include/asm/ppc-opcode.h 2009-07-22 15:25:45.000000000 +1000 +++ linux-work/arch/powerpc/include/asm/ppc-opcode.h 2009-07-22 15:26:05.000000000 +1000 @@ -48,6 +48,8 @@ #define PPC_INST_TLBIE 0x7c000264 #define PPC_INST_TLBILX 0x7c000024 #define PPC_INST_WAIT 0x7c00007c +#define PPC_INST_TLBIVAX 0x7c000624 +#define PPC_INST_TLBSRX_DOT 0x7c0006a5 /* macros to insert fields into opcodes */ #define __PPC_RA(a) (((a) & 0x1f) << 16) @@ -76,6 +78,10 @@ __PPC_WC(w)) #define PPC_TLBIE(lp,a) stringify_in_c(.long PPC_INST_TLBIE | \ __PPC_RB(a) | __PPC_RS(lp)) +#define PPC_TLBSRX_DOT(a,b) stringify_in_c(.long PPC_INST_TLBSRX_DOT | \ + __PPC_RA(a) | __PPC_RB(b)) +#define PPC_TLBIVAX(a,b) stringify_in_c(.long PPC_INST_TLBIVAX | \ + __PPC_RA(a) | __PPC_RB(b)) /* * Define what the VSX XX1 form instructions will look like, then add
This adds the opcode definitions to ppc-opcode.h for the two instructions tlbivax and tlbsrx. as defined by Book3E 2.06 Signed-off-by: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org> --- arch/powerpc/include/asm/ppc-opcode.h | 6 ++++++ 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)