On 08/14/2015 08:22 AM, Michael Ellerman wrote:

On Thu, 2015-08-06 at 18:54 +0530, Anshuman Khandual wrote:

quoted

On 08/04/2015 03:27 PM, Michael Ellerman wrote:

quoted

On Mon, 2015-13-07 at 08:16:06 UTC, Anshuman Khandual wrote:

quoted

This patch enables facility unavailable exceptions for generic facility,
FPU, ALTIVEC and VSX in /proc/interrupts listing by incrementing their
newly added IRQ statistical counters as and when these exceptions happen.
This also adds couple of helper functions which will be called from within
the interrupt handler context to update their statistics. Similarly this
patch also enables alignment and program check exceptions as well.

...

quoted

diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kernel/exceptions-64s.S b/arch/powerpc/kernel/exceptions-64s.S
index 0a0399c2..a86180c 100644
--- a/arch/powerpc/kernel/exceptions-64s.S
+++ b/arch/powerpc/kernel/exceptions-64s.S

@@ -1158,6 +1158,7 @@ BEGIN_FTR_SECTION
 END_FTR_SECTION_IFSET(CPU_FTR_TM)
 #endif
 	bl	load_up_fpu
+	bl	fpu_unav_exceptions_count

Is it safe to call C code here?

Hmm, is it not ? I had that question but was not really sure. Dont
understand the difference between 'fast_exception_return' and
'ret_from_except' completely.

If you're "not really sure" it's correct, please say so in the change log!

Yeah I should have written that up some where after the commit
message (after "---"). Its my bad, will take care of this next
time around.

I'd rather you didn't send me patches with possibly subtle bugs in core code.

Michael, I understand your concern. I was just trying to add
new entries in there which would help us. Wondering whats our
plan for this patch, if we change it as I had proposed earlier,
will it be good enough.