[PATCH 2/2 V7] powerpc/85xx: Add machine check handler to fix PCIe erratum on mpc85xx

[Jia Hongtao-B38951]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Wood Scott-B07421
> Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2013 4:30 AM
> To: Jia Hongtao-B38951
> Cc: Wood Scott-B07421; Segher Boessenkool; linuxppc-dev at lists.ozlabs.org;
> galak at kernel.crashing.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2 V7] powerpc/85xx: Add machine check handler to
> fix PCIe erratum on mpc85xx
> 
> On 04/26/2013 09:26:26 PM, Jia Hongtao-B38951 wrote:
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Wood Scott-B07421
> > > Sent: Friday, April 26, 2013 12:58 AM
> > > To: Segher Boessenkool
> > > Cc: Jia Hongtao-B38951; linuxppc-dev at lists.ozlabs.org;
> > > galak at kernel.crashing.org; Wood Scott-B07421
> > > Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2 V7] powerpc/85xx: Add machine check handler
> > to
> > > fix PCIe erratum on mpc85xx
> > >
> > > On 04/25/2013 10:31:51 AM, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> > > >> * Remove A variant of load instruction emulation
> > > >
> > > > Why is this?  You handle all other simple load insns, there is
> > nothing
> > > > special about LHA.  (I reviewed the V4 email thread, no reason
> > for the
> > > > chance is given there).
> > >
> > > The LHA implementation in V5 was incorrect (didn't sign-extend).
> > >
> > > -Scott
> >
> > In former email you doubt whether we need A variant or not.
> > Any particular reason for that?
> > If not should I emulate all the A ARX AU AUX and AX variant?
> 
> I was just noting that the variants you left out from the earlier
> revisions (e.g. BRX) were much more likely to be used for I/O than some
> of the ones you included (e.g. "A").  Implementing all the normal
> load/store instructions would be better, if they're done correctly.
> 
> -Scott

All right.
I have submitted a new version and please have a review.
http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/240238/
http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/240239/

Thanks.
-Hongtao