Ralf Baechle wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 02, 2002 at 11:32:18AM +0200, Carsten Langgaard wrote:
> > > > After looking at the generated assembly I discovered the handlers don't
> > > > fit in 128 bytes. They didn't crash since I have modules disabled for
> > > > now, so the vmalloc path didn't get hit and the user path happened to
> > > > fit,
> > > > but it was pure luck. The path got hit before I fixed a bug in gas
> > > > though
> > > > -- that's the explanation of the false cache error exceptions I used to
> > > > observe.
> > >
> > > Ouch. It was a known problem but we simply ignored it for a while as that
> > > handler just overwrites the cache error handler which normally should be
> > > used extremly rarely, if at all. The problem is somewhat itching by now
> > > as we're supporting the SB1 core which in it's revision one may throw
> > > spurious cache errors, so the handler is actually used ...
> > >
> > Maybe it's time for some intelligent check for the size of these exception
> > routine.
> Easy trick at compile time which will just inflate the object code a little
> .align 5
> .org except_vec1_r4k + 0x80
> This will result in an assembler error if the body of the except_vec1_r4k
> function is bigger than 0x80.
Great idea, please put it in the code.
_ _ ____ ___ Carsten Langgaard Mailto:email@example.com
|\ /|||___)(___ MIPS Denmark Direct: +45 4486 5527
| \/ ||| ____) Lautrupvang 4B Switch: +45 4486 5555
TECHNOLOGIES 2750 Ballerup Fax...: +45 4486 5556