On Sünndag 15 Mai 2005 12:08, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Sünndag 15 Mai 2005 08:29, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> > Why not just write(pc) to start and read back status from the same
> > file ?
I just remembered the strongest reason against using write() to set
the instruction pointer: It breaks signal delivery during execution
of SPU code. With an ioctl or system call based interface, the kernel
simply updates the instruction pointer in process memory before
calling a signal handler. When/if the signal handler returns, it
does the same call again with the updated argument and the SPU
continues to fetch code at the point where it stopped.
If I do a read() based interface, there are no input parameters
at all, so restarted system calls work as well.
How about this one:
read() starts execution and returns the status value in a four
byte buffer.
Calling lseek() on the "run" file updates the instruction pointer,
so the library call can work like this plus error handling:
extern char *mapped_local_store;
uint32_t status;
int runfd = open("run", O_RDONLY);
lseek(runfd, INITIAL_INSTRUCTION, SEEK_SET);
do {
read(runfd, &status, 4);
if (status == SPU_DO_LIBRARY_CALL) {
size_t arg = lseek(runfd, 4, SEEK_CUR) - 4;
do_library_call(mapped_local_store + arg);
}
} while (status != SPU_EXIT);
Arnd <><
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
