Hi everyone,
So having a poke around various bits of documentation relating to implementing pgmap@, I've come to the realisation that since the Solaris kernel needs to install it's own va>tte-data implementation into OpenBIOS then it's going to be necessary to call back into Forth from the D/I-MMU miss traps.
I've been looking around the code in arch/sparc64/switch.S but it looks as if this code only swaps between 2 individual contexts - am I right in thinking there needs to be a way of specifying the memory address of the context for this code to be reusable during a trap? Or would a better way be to duplicate this file but with another static context used only for MMU miss traps?
Another question for PPC users: will pgmap@/pgmap! be required there too? I'm trying to figure out if this is something that needs to live within libopenbios/ofmem_common.c or whether it's just a SPARC-specific hack. It looks as if these words are also required for SPARC32 so I'm leaning towards the former...
ATB,
Mark.
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 3:38 PM, Mark Cave-Ayland mark.cave-ayland@siriusit.co.uk wrote:
Hi everyone,
So having a poke around various bits of documentation relating to implementing pgmap@, I've come to the realisation that since the Solaris kernel needs to install it's own va>tte-data implementation into OpenBIOS then it's going to be necessary to call back into Forth from the D/I-MMU miss traps.
The thought of that gives me the shivers.
I've been looking around the code in arch/sparc64/switch.S but it looks as if this code only swaps between 2 individual contexts - am I right in thinking there needs to be a way of specifying the memory address of the context for this code to be reusable during a trap? Or would a better way be to duplicate this file but with another static context used only for MMU miss traps?
Sparc64 should use the same approach as Sparc32 (and x86): save the context to stack. It's even easier than Sparc32 because there is a window flush instruction.
Blue Swirl wrote:
So having a poke around various bits of documentation relating to implementing pgmap@, I've come to the realisation that since the Solaris kernel needs to install it's own va>tte-data implementation into OpenBIOS then it's going to be necessary to call back into Forth from the D/I-MMU miss traps.
The thought of that gives me the shivers.
It sounds scary, but I don't think it will be too bad. Looking at arch/sparc64/entry.S, it seems like the OpenBIOS memory regions are locked into the TLB as N x 512K entries - so as long as we don't end up with MMU miss trap recursion, we should be good.
The plan I have in my mind goes something like this:
- Alter the D/I-MMU trap miss handlers so they invoke a C function rather than iterate through the translations structure in ASM.
- Initially make the C function do exactly the same as the current ASM for testing.
- Create a simple Forth function to perform the address translation.
- Modify the C function to invoke feval(...) on the translation function instead of iterating through the translations structure directly.
I've been looking around the code in arch/sparc64/switch.S but it looks as if this code only swaps between 2 individual contexts - am I right in thinking there needs to be a way of specifying the memory address of the context for this code to be reusable during a trap? Or would a better way be to duplicate this file but with another static context used only for MMU miss traps?
Sparc64 should use the same approach as Sparc32 (and x86): save the context to stack. It's even easier than Sparc32 because there is a window flush instruction.
Hmmm. SPARC64 definitely doesn't do this right at the moment - instead of saving context to the stack, it seems to save it back into the static context structure :(
Looks like the first trick is to figure out how to store the context on the stack instead. However, since __switch_context automatically restores all registers upon exit, I'm not sure even then we could use it within a trap handler since we'd want the TTE data entry returned in one of the registers when we are finished so we can add the entry to the MMU. Maybe there is a better way of refactoring this code so we can share the majority of it?
Also I see that arch/sparc64/switch.S is marked as ".align 4" - shouldn't this be 8 for a 64-bit architecture? Not that it seems to matter at the moment...
ATB,
Mark.
On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 12:28 PM, Mark Cave-Ayland mark.cave-ayland@siriusit.co.uk wrote:
Blue Swirl wrote:
So having a poke around various bits of documentation relating to implementing pgmap@, I've come to the realisation that since the Solaris kernel needs to install it's own va>tte-data implementation into OpenBIOS then it's going to be necessary to call back into Forth from the D/I-MMU miss traps.
The thought of that gives me the shivers.
It sounds scary, but I don't think it will be too bad. Looking at arch/sparc64/entry.S, it seems like the OpenBIOS memory regions are locked into the TLB as N x 512K entries - so as long as we don't end up with MMU miss trap recursion, we should be good.
The plan I have in my mind goes something like this:
- Alter the D/I-MMU trap miss handlers so they invoke a C function rather
than iterate through the translations structure in ASM.
The registers need to be saved at this point. There are also several sets of global registers (%g1-%g7), which may need separate handling.
- Initially make the C function do exactly the same as the current ASM for
testing.
Create a simple Forth function to perform the address translation.
Modify the C function to invoke feval(...) on the translation function
instead of iterating through the translations structure directly.
I've been looking around the code in arch/sparc64/switch.S but it looks as if this code only swaps between 2 individual contexts - am I right in thinking there needs to be a way of specifying the memory address of the context for this code to be reusable during a trap? Or would a better way be to duplicate this file but with another static context used only for MMU miss traps?
Sparc64 should use the same approach as Sparc32 (and x86): save the context to stack. It's even easier than Sparc32 because there is a window flush instruction.
Hmmm. SPARC64 definitely doesn't do this right at the moment - instead of saving context to the stack, it seems to save it back into the static context structure :(
Looks like the first trick is to figure out how to store the context on the stack instead. However, since __switch_context automatically restores all registers upon exit, I'm not sure even then we could use it within a trap handler since we'd want the TTE data entry returned in one of the registers when we are finished so we can add the entry to the MMU. Maybe there is a better way of refactoring this code so we can share the majority of it?
The saved context could be stored into a location which would be visible to C/Forth code, so that it could alter the return value register.
Also I see that arch/sparc64/switch.S is marked as ".align 4" - shouldn't this be 8 for a 64-bit architecture? Not that it seems to matter at the moment...
The instructions on Sparc64 still only require 4 byte alignment. If we also considered cache line effects, the alignment should be 32 or 64 bytes, like Linux .S files. In QEMU, the best alignment probably depends on host data cache line size.
-
Blue Swirl -
Mark Cave-Ayland