forked from luck/tmp_suning_uos_patched
powerpc: Disable VSX or current process in giveup_fpu/altivec
When we call giveup_fpu, we need to need to turn off VSX for the current process. If we don't, on return to userspace it may execute a VSX instruction before the next FP instruction, and not have its register state refreshed correctly from the thread_struct. Ditto for altivec. This caused a bug where an unaligned lfs or stfs results in fix_alignment calling giveup_fpu so it can use the FPRs (in order to do a single <-> double conversion), and then returning to userspace with FP off but VSX on. Then if a VSX instruction is executed, before another FP instruction, it will proceed without another exception and hence have the incorrect register state for VSX registers 0-31. lfs unaligned <- alignment exception turns FP off but leaves VSX on VSX instruction <- no exception since VSX on, hence we get the wrong VSX register values for VSX registers 0-31, which overlap the FPRs. Signed-off-by: Michael Neuling <mikey@neuling.org> Signed-off-by: Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>
This commit is contained in:
parent
4c6cf42843
commit
7e875e9dc8
@ -145,6 +145,11 @@ END_FTR_SECTION_IFSET(CPU_FTR_VSX)
|
||||
beq 1f
|
||||
PPC_LL r4,_MSR-STACK_FRAME_OVERHEAD(r5)
|
||||
li r3,MSR_FP|MSR_FE0|MSR_FE1
|
||||
#ifdef CONFIG_VSX
|
||||
BEGIN_FTR_SECTION
|
||||
oris r3,r3,MSR_VSX@h
|
||||
END_FTR_SECTION_IFSET(CPU_FTR_VSX)
|
||||
#endif
|
||||
andc r4,r4,r3 /* disable FP for previous task */
|
||||
PPC_STL r4,_MSR-STACK_FRAME_OVERHEAD(r5)
|
||||
1:
|
||||
|
@ -495,7 +495,15 @@ _GLOBAL(giveup_altivec)
|
||||
stvx vr0,r4,r3
|
||||
beq 1f
|
||||
ld r4,_MSR-STACK_FRAME_OVERHEAD(r5)
|
||||
#ifdef CONFIG_VSX
|
||||
BEGIN_FTR_SECTION
|
||||
lis r3,(MSR_VEC|MSR_VSX)@h
|
||||
FTR_SECTION_ELSE
|
||||
lis r3,MSR_VEC@h
|
||||
ALT_FTR_SECTION_END_IFSET(CPU_FTR_VSX)
|
||||
#else
|
||||
lis r3,MSR_VEC@h
|
||||
#endif
|
||||
andc r4,r4,r3 /* disable FP for previous task */
|
||||
std r4,_MSR-STACK_FRAME_OVERHEAD(r5)
|
||||
1:
|
||||
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
Block a user