On Sun, Sep 22, 2013 at 11:30:59PM +0100, Maciej W. Rozycki wrote:
> There is no reliable way to tell R4000/R4400 SC and MC variations apart,
> however simple heuristic should give good results. Only the MC version
> supports coherent caching so we can rely on such a mode having been set
> for KSEG0 by the power-on firmware to reliably indicate an MC processor.
> SC processors reportedly hang on coherent cached memory accesses and Linux
> is linked to a cached load address so the firmware has to use the correct
> caching mode to download the kernel image in a cached mode successfully.
> OTOH if the firmware chooses to use either the non-coherent cached or the
> uncached mode for KSEG0 on an MC processor, then the SC variant will be
> reported, just as we currently do, so no regression here.
> Signed-off-by: Maciej W. Rozycki <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> I believe we discussed this once long ago and you had some concerns about
> such an approach although I don't recall exactly what they were. I
> maintain that this heuristic is reasonable, has no drawbacks and has a
> potential to make some optimisations or errata workarounds easier. Also
> we can collect data about systems affected to see what their firmware does
> -- R4000SC/R4400SC DECstations definitely get CP0.Config.K0 right.
I'm fairly sure it gets k0 right - otherwise it'd likely not work at all!
My reservations may have been about userland reading /proc/cpuinfo and
looking at the CPU type. Some software may know how to handle the
PC/SC variants but not the MC versions. But this seems to be a fairly
weak concern - and I trust you checked gcc's parsing of /proc/cpuinfo.