Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2014 13:36:55 -0700 From: Warner Losh <wlosh@bsdimp.com> To: Stacey Son <sson@FreeBSD.org> Cc: "freebsd-mips@freebsd.org" <freebsd-mips@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: [RFC] Enable use of UserLocal Register (ULRI) if detected (patches) Message-ID: <A89740CB-E3A8-49DA-8330-8DDA54BF1837@bsdimp.com> In-Reply-To: <7FA7DFD1-B1F1-400A-9107-8D8450B309A2@FreeBSD.org> References: <D964DBB1-3727-4B8A-B4E3-50FD8A300818@FreeBSD.org> <092B0786-EA73-44D0-81FC-DFB56B14D4D7@bsdimp.com> <7FA7DFD1-B1F1-400A-9107-8D8450B309A2@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Feb 19, 2014, at 11:39 AM, Stacey Son wrote: >=20 > On Feb 19, 2014, at 11:52 AM, Warner Losh <wlosh@bsdimp.com> wrote: >=20 >> +/* Register numbers */ >> +#define _V0 2 >> +#define _A1 5 >> +#define _T0 12 >> +#define _RA 31 >>=20 >> We already have defines for these registers elsewhere. Any reason why = you chose not to use them? Also, is there any ABI difference to be = worried about? >=20 > Hmm... I missed these in sys/mips/include/regnum.h for some reason. = :) >=20 >> The rest looks generally good, apart from references to git versions = that might be difficult to find in the future. Consider moving details = inline instead. >=20 > That was really just a note to myself that I forgot to remove. >=20 > I have refreshed the patch with these changes: >=20 > http://people.freebsd.org/~sson/mips/ulri/ulri_kernel.diff Did you upload the right patch, since this seems to be using the new = #defines still.. >>> The final patch is for qemu system-mode that adds support for the = ULRI: >>>=20 >>> http://people.freebsd.org/~sson/mips/ulri/ulri_qemu.diff >>=20 >> Can't say about these... >=20 > Qemu, like a lot of MIPS hardware it seems, doesn't support the ULRI. = The above is a just quick hack to qemu to add support as a 'FYI'. I = should maybe clean it up and submit it to the qemu development list. OK. I'll have to give these patches a spin on my octeon boards. I'd had = a conversation with one if Cavium's engineers years ago where he said = that he wished FreeBSD implemented TLS this way, implying cavium has = them. But seeing the other note from Juli makes me unsure (since she = would know better than I)... Warner=
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?A89740CB-E3A8-49DA-8330-8DDA54BF1837>