|
Message-ID: <BD7773622145634B952E5B54ACA8E349AA24B25D@PUMAIL01.pu.imgtec.org> Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2016 06:37:41 +0000 From: Jaydeep Patil <Jaydeep.Patil@...tec.com> To: "musl@...ts.openwall.com" <musl@...ts.openwall.com> Subject: RE: [PATCH] Fix atomic_arch.h for MIPS32 R6 >-----Original Message----- >From: Rich Felker [mailto:dalias@...ifal.cx] On Behalf Of Rich Felker >Sent: 23 March 2016 AM 02:52 >To: musl@...ts.openwall.com >Subject: Re: [musl] [PATCH] Fix atomic_arch.h for MIPS32 R6 > >On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 04:58:51AM +0000, Jaydeep Patil wrote: >> >-----Original Message----- >> >From: Rich Felker [mailto:dalias@...ifal.cx] On Behalf Of >> >dalias@...c.org >> >Sent: 21 March 2016 PM 11:08 >> >To: musl@...ts.openwall.com >> >Subject: Re: [musl] [PATCH] Fix atomic_arch.h for MIPS32 R6 >> > >> >On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 06:03:47AM +0000, Jaydeep Patil wrote: >> >> Hi Rich, >> >> >> >> The arch/mips/atomic_arch.h uses MIPS2 opcode for LL and SC >> >> instructions. Opcodes of these instructions differ on MIPSR6. >> > >> >Does this mean MIPSR6 is an incompatible ISA that can't run normal >> >MIPS binaries? If so that's a messy situation we need to find a way >> >to deal with; if the difference is just LLSC though then perhaps the >> >kernel's emulation handles it (albeit very slowly). >> > >> > >> >It would be helpful if you could provide a link to the documentation >> >of this issue (different opcodes). >> >> Refer to >> https://imagination-technologies-cloudfront-assets.s3.amazonaws.com/do >> cumentation/MD00086-2B-MIPS32BIS-AFP-06.04.pdf >> (Page 209) for details. > >Page 454 contains the best info I could find, which seems to say that MIPS R6 >is essentially a MIPS-incompatible ISA (it can't reliably execute pre-R6 code). Is >this correct? If so that's really unfortunate. Unfortunately there does not R6 is not binary compatible with pre-R6. >seem to be any info here specific to LL/SC, and the page 209 you cited is really >sparse. It is page 219 which talks about R6 and pre-R6 LL opcodes. >If this is really the case then we probably need to consider whether some kind >of awful runtime-switching mechanism is needed for baseline MIPS ISA levels, >or whether users just have to consider R6 "incapable of running pre-R6 >binaries". But in the latter case we might want to use a different dynamic >linker name for R6. > >> >> arch/mips/atomic_arch.h | 8 ++++++++ >> >> 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+) >> >> >> >> diff --git a/arch/mips/atomic_arch.h b/arch/mips/atomic_arch.h >> >> index >> >> ce2823b..16b1542 100644 >> >> --- a/arch/mips/atomic_arch.h >> >> +++ b/arch/mips/atomic_arch.h >> >> @@ -3,9 +3,13 @@ static inline int a_ll(volatile int *p) { >> >> int v; >> >> __asm__ __volatile__ ( >> >> +#if __mips_isa_rev < 6 >> >> ".set push ; .set mips2\n\t" >> >> +#endif >> >> "ll %0, %1" >> >> +#if __mips_isa_rev < 6 >> >> "\n\t.set pop" >> >> +#endif >> > >> >I think just the .set mips2 could be inside #ifdef with the push/pop >> >always used; that produces less #ifdef clutter. But first we need to >> >figure out the above issues. >> >> We don't need push/pop if we are not doing mips2 > >I was just saying it makes the code less cluttered to use them spuriously even >though we don't need to: > > ".set push ; " >#if __mips_isa_rev < 6 > ".set mips2 ; " >#endif > "ll %0, %1 ; .set pop" > >or similar. > >It's also not clear to me whether the "m" constraint is valid anymore for the R6 >ll/sc instructions since they take a 9-bit offset now instead of a 16-bit offset. >The compiler could generate an address expression whose offset part does >not fit in 9 bits. In that case we may need to #if the whole function (or at least >the __asm__ statement) separately rather than just skipping the .set mips2... > The "m" constrain is still valid here, as the offset will be 0 in this case. >Rich
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.