mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com>,
	linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, linux390@de.ibm.com,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
	Dave Hansen <dave@sr71.net>
Subject: Re: sched, s390: Fix the fallout of increasing the offset of 'thread_struct' within 'task_struct'
Date: Mon, 20 Jul 2015 07:31:55 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <55AD065B.1050103@roeck-us.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150720073417.GA10134@gmail.com>

On 07/20/2015 12:34 AM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Guenter <linux@roeck-us.net> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Commit 0c8c0f03e3a2 ("x86/fpu, sched: Dynamically allocate 'struct fpu'")
>> causes s390 builds in mainline to fail as follows.
>>
>> arch/s390/kernel/traps.c: Assembler messages:
>> arch/s390/kernel/traps.c:262: Error: operand out of range
>> 	(0x00000000000023e8 is not between 0x0000000000000000 and 0x0000000000000fff)
>> arch/s390/kernel/traps.c:300: Error: operand out of range
>> 	(0x00000000000023e8 is not between 0x0000000000000000 and 0x0000000000000fff)
>
>
> Yeah, so I'm really out on a limb here as I know next to nothing about s390
> assembly, but the build failure appears to be analogous to the arm64 one: the
> offset of thread_struct fields within task_struct increased due to commit
> 0c8c0f03e3a2 ("x86/fpu, sched: Dynamically allocate 'struct fpu'"), which
> increased assembly offsets beyond the limit this instruction can apparently
> encode.
>
> Does the (untested!) patch below help?
>
> It's an equivalent transformation on the C side, but it might cause GCC to
> generate different assembly code, because we now have a temporary variable with
> much smaller offsets.
>
> The code is also a tiny bit cleaner this way, as the 'current->thread.fp_regs'
> pattern isn't repeated twice.
>
> In case this works:
>
>     Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
>
> Thanks,
>
> 	Ingo
>
> ================>
>
>   arch/s390/kernel/traps.c | 6 ++++--
>   1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/s390/kernel/traps.c b/arch/s390/kernel/traps.c
> index 4d96c9f53455..db6f0eec55b5 100644
> --- a/arch/s390/kernel/traps.c
> +++ b/arch/s390/kernel/traps.c
> @@ -251,6 +251,7 @@ int alloc_vector_registers(struct task_struct *tsk)
>
>   void vector_exception(struct pt_regs *regs)
>   {
> +	s390_fp_regs *fp_regs = &current->thread.fp_regs;
>   	int si_code, vic;
>
>   	if (!MACHINE_HAS_VX) {
> @@ -259,8 +260,9 @@ void vector_exception(struct pt_regs *regs)
>   	}
>
>   	/* get vector interrupt code from fpc */
> -	asm volatile("stfpc %0" : "=m" (current->thread.fp_regs.fpc));
> -	vic = (current->thread.fp_regs.fpc & 0xf00) >> 8;
> +	asm volatile("stfpc %0" : "=m" (fp_regs->fpc));
> +	vic = (fp_regs->fpc & 0xf00) >> 8;
> +

No idea why, but this still fails with the same error (I suspect the compiler
tries to optimize the fp_regs variable away). I can compile the code by using
a local variable '__u32 fpc', but obviously I don't know if that is correct.
I don't have a working qemu configuration for s390, so I can not run any tests.

Guenter


      reply	other threads:[~2015-07-20 14:32 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-07-18 23:27 Build error due to "x86/fpu, sched: Dynamically allocate 'struct fpu'" Guenter
2015-07-18 23:34 ` Guenter
2015-07-20  7:20   ` [PATCH] sched, arm64: Fix the fallout of increasing the offset of 'thread_struct' within 'task_struct' Ingo Molnar
2015-07-20 13:52     ` Guenter Roeck
2015-07-20 14:03       ` Catalin Marinas
2015-07-20  7:34 ` sched, s390: " Ingo Molnar
2015-07-20 14:31   ` Guenter Roeck [this message]

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=55AD065B.1050103@roeck-us.net \
    --to=linux@roeck-us.net \
    --cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
    --cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=dave@sr71.net \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux390@de.ibm.com \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=schwidefsky@de.ibm.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

Powered by JetHome