Regards, Xiongwei > On Apr 1, 2021, at 4:01 PM, Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Excerpts from Michael Ellerman's message of April 1, 2021 12:39 pm: >> Segher Boessenkool <segher@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: >>> On Wed, Mar 31, 2021 at 08:58:17PM +1100, Michael Ellerman wrote: >>>> So perhaps: >>>> >>>> EXC_SYSTEM_RESET >>>> EXC_MACHINE_CHECK >>>> EXC_DATA_STORAGE >>>> EXC_DATA_SEGMENT >>>> EXC_INST_STORAGE >>>> EXC_INST_SEGMENT >>>> EXC_EXTERNAL_INTERRUPT >>>> EXC_ALIGNMENT >>>> EXC_PROGRAM_CHECK >>>> EXC_FP_UNAVAILABLE >>>> EXC_DECREMENTER >>>> EXC_HV_DECREMENTER >>>> EXC_SYSTEM_CALL >>>> EXC_HV_DATA_STORAGE >>>> EXC_PERF_MONITOR >>> >>> These are interrupt (vectors), not exceptions. It doesn't matter all >>> that much, but confusing things more isn't useful either! There can be >>> multiple exceptions that all can trigger the same interrupt. >> >> Yeah I know, but I think that ship has already sailed as far as the >> naming we have in the kernel. > > It has, but there are also several other ships also sailing in different > directions. It could be worse though, at least they are not sideways in > the Suez. > >> We have over 250 uses of "exc", and several files called "exception" >> something. >> >> Using "interrupt" can also be confusing because Linux uses that to mean >> "external interrupt". >> >> But I dunno, maybe INT or VEC is clearer? .. or TRAP :) > > We actually already have defines that follow Segher's suggestion, it's > just that they're hidden away in a KVM header. > > #define BOOK3S_INTERRUPT_SYSTEM_RESET 0x100 > #define BOOK3S_INTERRUPT_MACHINE_CHECK 0x200 > #define BOOK3S_INTERRUPT_DATA_STORAGE 0x300 > #define BOOK3S_INTERRUPT_DATA_SEGMENT 0x380 > #define BOOK3S_INTERRUPT_INST_STORAGE 0x400 > #define BOOK3S_INTERRUPT_INST_SEGMENT 0x480 > #define BOOK3S_INTERRUPT_EXTERNAL 0x500 > #define BOOK3S_INTERRUPT_EXTERNAL_HV 0x502 > #define BOOK3S_INTERRUPT_ALIGNMENT 0x600 > > It would take just a small amount of work to move these to general > powerpc header, add #ifdefs for Book E/S where the numbers differ, > and remove the BOOK3S_ prefix. > > I don't mind INTERRUPT_ but INT_ would be okay too. VEC_ actually > doesn't match what Book E does (which is some weirdness to map some > of them to match Book S but not all, arguably we should clean that > up too and just use vector numbers consistently, but the INTERRUPT_ > prefix would still be valid if we did that). > > BookE KVM entry will still continue to use a different convention > there so I would leave all those KVM defines in place for now, we > might do another pass on them later. Thanks for the comments. > > Thanks, > Nick
