fsl_rio.c build problem

Hi,

I'm using:

git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git

and building for ARCH=powerpc - mpc85xx_defconfig

arch/powerpc/sysdev/fsl_rio.c will not build due to a missing MCSR_MASK bitmask definition.

The attached patch is based on code found in

git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/benh/powerpc.git

and - at the least - will fix the build problem.

BR,
Kerstin

From: Kerstin Jonsson <[email protected]>
Date: Fri, 4 Jun 2010 12:56:02 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] fix fsl_rio.c build problem in powerpc mpc85xx_defconfig

---
 arch/powerpc/include/asm/reg_booke.h |   11 +++++++++++
 1 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)

index 2360317..68c3833 100644
@@ -231,6 +231,12 @@
 #define MCSR_LDG	0x00002000UL /* Guarded Load */
 #define MCSR_TLBSYNC	0x00000002UL /* Multiple tlbsyncs detected */
 #define MCSR_BSL2_ERR	0x00000001UL /* Backside L2 cache error */
+
+/* e500 parts may set unused bits in MCSR; mask these off */
+#define MCSR_MASK	(MCSR_MCP | MCSR_ICPERR | MCSR_DCP_PERR | \
+			MCSR_DCPERR | MCSR_BUS_IAERR | MCSR_BUS_RAERR | \
+			MCSR_BUS_WAERR | MCSR_BUS_IBERR | MCSR_BUS_RBERR | \
+			MCSR_BUS_WBERR | MCSR_BUS_IPERR | MCSR_BUS_RPERR)
 #endif
 
 #ifdef CONFIG_E200

@@ -243,6 +249,11 @@
 #define MCSR_BUS_DRERR 	0x00000008UL /* Read Bus Error on data load */
 #define MCSR_BUS_WRERR 	0x00000004UL /* Write Bus Error on buffered
 					store or cache line push */
+
+/* e200 parts may set unused bits in MCSR; mask these off */
+#define MCSR_MASK	(MCSR_MCP | MCSR_CP_PERR | MCSR_CPERR | \
+			MCSR_EXCP_ERR | MCSR_BUS_IRERR | MCSR_BUS_DRERR | \
+			MCSR_BUS_WRERR)
 #endif
 
 /* Bit definitions for the DBSR. */

1.7.1

Can we remove the use of MCSR_MASK from fsl_rio.c instead? I don't see what it's accomplishing here. MCSR_MASK will be wrong on e500mc, so exporting it as something that looks generic doesn't seem right.

MCSR_BUS_RBERR also needs to change on e500mc -- you'll probably get MCSR_LDG.

-Scott

Thanks for pointing that out, I agree in the context it's currently used in the fsl_rio.c, it's not obvious what purpose it serves.

I have a e500v2 so I guess that just removing the MCSR_MASK from the fsl_rio.c will make no difference in my case.

Someone that know the e500mc probably need to have a look at this part of the fsl_rio.c then.

BR,
Kerstin