On Tue, 5 Oct 2004, Ralf Baechle wrote: > > 1. The handler is expected to be for R4000/R4400 only. If it's used for > > You're alone in that believe. Despite it's name it's being used for > anything that doesn't need it's own special handler. Well, the nearby comment agrees with me. Is the handler misused or has someone forgotten to fix the comment (yes, I do know of the R4700 and R4640/R4650, with the former being almost identical to the R4600 and the latters being unsupported due to lacking a TLB MMU)? > > 2. The except_vec0_sb1 handler is one with the nop omitted, so it can be > > used for these processors. > > Adding more obscurity? Just moving it elsewhere. ;-) > > 3. Correct operation first, only then optimization. > > On of the free software lessons is a bad solution is worse than no solution. And another one is anyone is free to provide a better fix. I suppose another alternative with the current implementation is to make a "generic" handler separate from the R4000/R4400 one. This might even be not so troublesome maintenance-wise if done properly, but given the "grand plan" is it worth the hassle? Or is the "plan" scheduled for around 2.8 or so? Maciej
