[RTEMS Project] #2352: SPARC: Strange CPU_STACK_ALIGNMENT value
RTEMS trac
trac at rtems.org
Tue May 26 11:01:49 UTC 2015
#2352: SPARC: Strange CPU_STACK_ALIGNMENT value
-----------------------------+---------------------
Reporter: sebastian.huber | Owner: daniel
Type: defect | Status: new
Priority: normal | Milestone: 4.11
Component: General | Version: 4.11
Severity: normal | Resolution:
Keywords: |
-----------------------------+---------------------
Description changed by sebastian.huber:
Old description:
> We have
>
> /**
> * CPU's worst alignment requirement for data types on a byte boundary.
> This
> * alignment does not take into account the requirements for the stack.
> *
> * On the SPARC, this is required for double word loads and stores.
> */
> #define CPU_ALIGNMENT 8
>
> which is in line with the SPARC ABI.
>
> We have
>
> /**
> * This number corresponds to the byte alignment requirement for the
> * stack. This alignment requirement may be stricter than that for the
> * data types alignment specified by CPU_ALIGNMENT. If the CPU_ALIGNMENT
> * is strict enough for the stack, then this should be set to 0.
> *
> * NOTE: This must be a power of 2 either 0 or greater than
> CPU_ALIGNMENT.
> *
> * The alignment restrictions for the SPARC are not that strict but this
> * should unsure that the stack is always sufficiently alignment that the
> * window overflow, underflow, and flush routines can use double word
> loads
> * and stores.
> */
> #define CPU_STACK_ALIGNMENT 16
>
> which makes not really sense in combination with
>
> /** This defines the size of the ISF area for use in assembly. */
> #define CONTEXT_CONTROL_INTERRUPT_FRAME_SIZE \
> CPU_MINIMUM_STACK_FRAME_SIZE + 0x50
>
> (= not 16 byte aligned) and (_ISR_Handler)
>
> /*
> * Save the state of the interrupted task -- especially the
> global
> * registers -- in the Interrupt Stack Frame. Note that the ISF
> * includes a regular minimum stack frame which will be used if
> * needed by register window overflow and underflow handlers.
> *
> * REGISTERS SAME AS AT _ISR_Handler
> */
>
> sub %fp, CONTEXT_CONTROL_INTERRUPT_FRAME_SIZE, %sp
> ! make space for ISF
>
> I suggest to change CPU_STACK_ALIGNMENT to
>
> #define CPU_STACK_ALIGNMENT CPU_ALIGNMENT
New description:
We have
{{{
/**
* CPU's worst alignment requirement for data types on a byte boundary.
This
* alignment does not take into account the requirements for the stack.
*
* On the SPARC, this is required for double word loads and stores.
*/
#define CPU_ALIGNMENT 8
}}}
which is in line with the SPARC ABI.
We have
{{{
/**
* This number corresponds to the byte alignment requirement for the
* stack. This alignment requirement may be stricter than that for the
* data types alignment specified by CPU_ALIGNMENT. If the CPU_ALIGNMENT
* is strict enough for the stack, then this should be set to 0.
*
* NOTE: This must be a power of 2 either 0 or greater than
CPU_ALIGNMENT.
*
* The alignment restrictions for the SPARC are not that strict but this
* should unsure that the stack is always sufficiently alignment that the
* window overflow, underflow, and flush routines can use double word
loads
* and stores.
*/
#define CPU_STACK_ALIGNMENT 16
}}}
which makes not really sense in combination with
{{{
/** This defines the size of the ISF area for use in assembly. */
#define CONTEXT_CONTROL_INTERRUPT_FRAME_SIZE \
CPU_MINIMUM_STACK_FRAME_SIZE + 0x50
}}}
(= not 16 byte aligned) and (_ISR_Handler)
{{{
/*
* Save the state of the interrupted task -- especially the
global
* registers -- in the Interrupt Stack Frame. Note that the ISF
* includes a regular minimum stack frame which will be used if
* needed by register window overflow and underflow handlers.
*
* REGISTERS SAME AS AT _ISR_Handler
*/
sub %fp, CONTEXT_CONTROL_INTERRUPT_FRAME_SIZE, %sp
! make space for ISF
}}}
I suggest to change CPU_STACK_ALIGNMENT to
{{{
#define CPU_STACK_ALIGNMENT CPU_ALIGNMENT
}}}
--
--
Ticket URL: <http://devel.rtems.org/ticket/2352#comment:1>
RTEMS Project <http://www.rtems.org/>
RTEMS Project
More information about the bugs
mailing list