> -----Original Message----- > From: Wood Scott-B07421 > Sent: Friday, May 10, 2013 8:42 PM > To: Caraman Mihai Claudiu-B02008 > Cc: Alexander Graf; Wood Scott-B07421; kvm-ppc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; > kvm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Subject: Re: [PATCH] kvm/ppc/booke64: fix build breakage from Altivec, > and disable e6500 > > On 05/10/2013 09:11:24 AM, Caraman Mihai Claudiu-B02008 wrote: > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Alexander Graf [mailto:agraf@xxxxxxx] > > > Sent: Friday, May 10, 2013 4:16 PM > > > To: Caraman Mihai Claudiu-B02008 > > > Cc: Wood Scott-B07421; kvm-ppc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; kvm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > > Subject: Re: [PATCH] kvm/ppc/booke64: fix build breakage from > > Altivec, > > > and disable e6500 > > > > > > > > > On 10.05.2013, at 11:40, Caraman Mihai Claudiu-B02008 wrote: > > > > > > >> -----Original Message----- > > > >> From: Wood Scott-B07421 > > > >> Sent: Friday, May 10, 2013 6:15 AM > > > >> To: Alexander Graf > > > >> Cc: kvm-ppc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; kvm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Wood > > Scott-B07421; > > > >> Caraman Mihai Claudiu-B02008 > > > >> Subject: [PATCH] kvm/ppc/booke64: fix build breakage from > > Altivec, and > > > >> disable e6500 > > > >> > > > >> BookE altivec support brought two new exceptions, but KVM was not > > > >> updated, so the build broke for all 64-bit booke with KVM > > enabled. > > > > > > > > We couldn't do that in KVM before having > > > BOOKE_INTERRUPT_ALTIVEC_UNAVAIL/ > > > > BOOKE_INTERRUPT_ALTIVEC_ASSIST. As Tiejun noticed earlier we > > should > > > have > > > > done this in Kumar's tree but we missed that chance. We will face > > > similar > > > > issues every time an exception handler will be added. > > > > > > How hard would it be to add? I suppose it's broken in 3.10, so we > > need > > > something quick before it gets released? > > > > Not so hard. Yes. I was surprised by this patch given the fact that > > we have > > planned to send altivec support upstream this days and that we > > already have > > a similar patch from Tiejun on our list. > > I didn't see Tiejun's patch... My goal was just to fix the build break > without exposing problems, and to encourage a patch to fix it properly > to happen sooner rather than later. With Tiejun's patch, which is > similar to mine except that it doesn't disable e6500 support, a user > could BUG() the kernel by forcing an Altivec exception in a guest. I > didn't want to go further down the road of adding reflectors for those > exceptions, which could make it look like the problem was dealt with > even though it's still not done. I agree it's quite annoying to hit a build breakage. Reflection is not a proper solution for this problem (though we will require it later) but program exception injection looks feasible as a simple fix. I wouldn't want to see e6500 removed for this reason. Thanks, Mike -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
