From: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>
To: Jiri Kosina <jikos@kernel.org>,
Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com>,
Vasily Gorbik <gor@linux.ibm.com>,
Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, Michal Kubecek <mkubecek@suse.cz>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5.4-rc1 BUILD FIX] s390: mark __cpacf_query() as __always_inline
Date: Wed, 2 Oct 2019 08:44:20 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <dc7f77bd-18d4-5f0e-6749-b00b23647f53@de.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <nycvar.YFH.7.76.1910012203010.13160@cbobk.fhfr.pm>
On 01.10.19 22:08, Jiri Kosina wrote:
> arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c calls on several places __cpacf_query() directly,
> which makes it impossible to meet the "i" constraint for the asm operands
> (opcode in this case).
>
> As we are now force-enabling CONFIG_OPTIMIZE_INLINING on all
> architectures, this causes a build failure on s390:
>
> In file included from arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c:44:
> ./arch/s390/include/asm/cpacf.h: In function '__cpacf_query':
> ./arch/s390/include/asm/cpacf.h:179:2: warning: asm operand 3 probably doesn't match constraints
> 179 | asm volatile(
> | ^~~
> ./arch/s390/include/asm/cpacf.h:179:2: error: impossible constraint in 'asm'
>
> Mark __cpacf_query() as __always_inline in order to fix that, analogically
> how we fixes __cpacf_check_opcode(), cpacf_query_func() and scpacf_query()
> already.
>
> Reported-and-tested-by: Michal Kubecek <mkubecek@suse.cz>
> Fixes: d83623c5eab2 ("s390: mark __cpacf_check_opcode() and cpacf_query_func() as __always_inline")
> Fixes: e60fb8bf68d4 ("s390/cpacf: mark scpacf_query() as __always_inline")
> Fixes: ac7c3e4ff401 ("compiler: enable CONFIG_OPTIMIZE_INLINING forcibly")
> Fixes: 9012d011660e ("compiler: allow all arches to enable CONFIG_OPTIMIZE_INLINING")
> Signed-off-by: Jiri Kosina <jkosina@suse.cz>
Thanks applied.
>
> I am wondering how is it possible that none of the build-testing
> infrastructure we have running against linux-next caught this? Not enough
> non-x86 coverage?
We do build-test linux-next daily. Maybe our compiler just made a different
inlining decision.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-10-02 6:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-10-01 20:08 Jiri Kosina
2019-10-01 20:15 ` Jiri Kosina
2019-10-02 6:44 ` Christian Borntraeger [this message]
2019-10-02 6:46 ` Heiko Carstens
2019-10-02 6:49 ` Heiko Carstens
2019-10-02 7:03 ` Michal Kubecek
2019-10-02 8:21 ` Heiko Carstens
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=dc7f77bd-18d4-5f0e-6749-b00b23647f53@de.ibm.com \
--to=borntraeger@de.ibm.com \
--cc=gor@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com \
--cc=jikos@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mkubecek@suse.cz \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=yamada.masahiro@socionext.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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®