commit f0a6c68f69981214cb7858738dd2bc81475111f7 upstream.
Fix the discrepancy between the two places we check for the CP0 counter
erratum in along with the incorrect comparison of the R4400 revision
number against 0x30 which matches none and consistently consider all
R4000 and R4400 processors affected, as documented in processor errata
publications[1][2][3], following the mapping between CP0 PRId register
values and processor models:
PRId | Processor Model
---------+--------------------
00000422 | R4000 Revision 2.2
00000430 | R4000 Revision 3.0
00000440 | R4400 Revision 1.0
00000450 | R4400 Revision 2.0
00000460 | R4400 Revision 3.0
No other revision of either processor has ever been spotted.
Contrary to what has been stated in commit ce202cbb9e ("[MIPS] Assume
R4000/R4400 newer than 3.0 don't have the mfc0 count bug") marking the
CP0 counter as buggy does not preclude it from being used as either a
clock event or a clock source device. It just cannot be used as both at
a time, because in that case clock event interrupts will be occasionally
lost, and the use as a clock event device takes precedence.
Compare against 0x4ff in `can_use_mips_counter' so that a single machine
instruction is produced.
References:
[1] "MIPS R4000PC/SC Errata, Processor Revision 2.2 and 3.0", MIPS
Technologies Inc., May 10, 1994, Erratum 53, p.13
[2] "MIPS R4400PC/SC Errata, Processor Revision 1.0", MIPS Technologies
Inc., February 9, 1994, Erratum 21, p.4
[3] "MIPS R4400PC/SC Errata, Processor Revision 2.0 & 3.0", MIPS
Technologies Inc., January 24, 1995, Erratum 14, p.3
Signed-off-by: Maciej W. Rozycki <macro@orcam.me.uk>
Fixes: ce202cbb9e ("[MIPS] Assume R4000/R4400 newer than 3.0 don't have the mfc0 count bug")
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org # v2.6.24+
Reviewed-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <f4bug@amsat.org>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Bogendoerfer <tsbogend@alpha.franken.de>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
326f02f172