[RFC][PATCH] Kexec support for PPC440x

[Suzuki Poulose]

On 06/02/11 12:04, Suzuki Poulose wrote:
> On 05/31/11 20:45, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
>>
>> Suzuki Poulose wrote:
>>> Index: powerpc/arch/powerpc/kernel/44x_kexec_mapping.S
>>> ===================================================================
>>> --- /dev/null
>>> +++ powerpc/arch/powerpc/kernel/44x_kexec_mapping.S
>> ....
>>
>>> + *
>>> + */
>>> + bl nxtins /* Find our address */
>>> +nxtins: mflr r5 /* Make it accessible */
>>
>> Please don't mix labels and instructions.
> OK.
>>
>>> + tlbsx r23,0,r5 /* Find entry we are in */
>>
>> using tabs instead of spaces would make it look nice. Please also separate the arguments of the instruction i.e.
>> tlbsx r23, 0, r5
>
> Sure.
>>
>>
>>> Index: powerpc/arch/powerpc/kernel/misc_32.S
>>> ===================================================================
>>> --- powerpc.orig/arch/powerpc/kernel/misc_32.S
>>> +++ powerpc/arch/powerpc/kernel/misc_32.S
>>> @@ -736,6 +736,28 @@ relocate_new_kernel:
>>> mr r5, r31
>>>
>>> li r0, 0
>>> +#elif defined(CONFIG_44x) && !defined(CONFIG_47x)
>>> +
>>> + mr r29, r3
>>> + mr r30, r4
>>> + mr r31, r5
>>> +
>>> +#include "44x_kexec_mapping.S"
>>
>> The way you setup the 1:1 mapping should be close to what you are doing on
>> kernel entry.Isn't it possible to include the file here and in the entry
>> code?

> I will make this change and resend the patch.

I took a look at the way we do it at kernel entry. It looks more cleaner to leave
it untouched. Especially, when we add the support for 47x in the future, the code
  will become more unreadable.

What do you think ?

Thanks

Suzuki
>
> Thanks
>
> Suzuki
> _______________________________________________
> Linuxppc-dev mailing list
> Linuxppc-dev at lists.ozlabs.org
> https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev