Merging 64 bit changes to -HEAD

[Luiz Otavio O Souza]

On Jun 30, 2010, at 7:40 PM, Jayachandran C. wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 10:38 PM, Luiz Otavio O Souza
> <lists.br at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Jun 30, 2010, at 9:57 AM, Jayachandran C. wrote:
>> 
>>> On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 10:32 PM, Luiz Otavio O Souza
>>> <lists.br at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> On Jun 29, 2010, at 8:02 AM, Jayachandran C. wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 2:28 AM, Luiz Otavio O Souza <lists.br at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> Thanks for the the update. Looks like pmap_map for kernel is failing,
>>>>>>> may be the new tlb_update code causes this.  Can you apply the
>>>>>>> attached patch and see if the problem still persists, it replaces the
>>>>>>> new tlb_update code with the older version.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Obviously not a fix, but if we can narrow it down to this function,
>>>>>>> fixing will be easier.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> JC.
>>>>>>> <try.diff>
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> JC,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> This fix the problem ! Thanks ! Now, at least, you know where to look :)
>>>>> 
>>>>> The new tlb_update does not seem to update the tlb entry if the tlbp
>>>>> fails.  Here's a patch that should make the new function behave like
>>>>> the older one.  The patch is in attached file 'tlb-update.diff'.
>>>>> 
>>>>> If that does not work, I'm not sure what the issue is.  You could also
>>>>> try try the nop-change.diff attached. It tries to switch the ssnop
>>>>> used for delay in the new code with 'nop' which was used by the old
>>>>> code.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> JC.
>>>>> <tlb-update.diff><nop-change.diff>
>>>> 
>>>> JC,
>>>> 
>>>> The nop-change seems to have no effect at all and with the tlb-update patch the kernel apparently crash at bzero(), here is the dmesg with TRAP_DEBUG enabled:
>>>> 
>>>> http://mips.pastebin.com/jydPvJ20
>>>> 
>>>> So hopefully you are on the right track and this may be something obvious to you.
>>> 
>>> Not yet :) I really hoped the earlier change would fix it.  The number
>>> of nop does not seem to be the issue as it is higher in the C code
>>> than the assembly.
>>> 
>>> Can you try the attached patch (try.diff) - this re-implements the
>>> assembly code functionality almost in the same way in C.  This really
>>> should work, given that the patch which made it assembly worked...
>>> 
>>> If that works can you see if the second attached patch works, this
>>> fixes a potential problem (ie, we should be masking 13bits for TLBHI).
>>> 
>>> Both patches should apply directly to SVN (not dependent on each
>>> other, or on previous patches)
>>> 
>>> Thanks again,
>>> JC.
>>> <try.diff><pte.h-fix.diff>
>> 
>> 
>> JC,
>> 
>> The try.diff works with or without the pte.h change (at least for a simple boot) and the pte.h change does nothing without the try.diff.
> 
> I've attached the final(final.diff) version I want to check-in, can
> you please quickly test it?
> 
> If that does not work, can you tell me if the attached alt1.diff or
> alt2.diff works? The try.diff had three changes: handle case of
> index>0, remove pagemask operation, restore full entryhi instead of
> asid. So if the first does not work, this will help narrow down the
> rest of the cases.
> 
> Hopefully this is the last iteration :)
> 
> JC.
> <final.diff><alt1.diff><alt2.diff>


JC,

The final.diff and alt1.diff crash (into debugger) like the first try.diff (here is the dmesg: http://pastebin.com/r2uunZPZ).

The alt2.diff works, i'll try it a little more (buildworld).

Feel free to send more tests if needed.

Thanks,
Luiz