| Message ID | 4dddbc2a-fc3f-5ea5-54be-8e2a5375db76@linux.vnet.ibm.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Not Applicable |
| Headers | show |
| Series | It looks like that wild_bctr on powerpc/fixes is still not compiling | expand |
| Context | Check | Description |
|---|---|---|
| snowpatch_ozlabs/apply_patch | warning | next/apply_patch Patch failed to apply |
| snowpatch_ozlabs/apply_patch | fail | Failed to apply to any branch |
Hi Gromero ;) Gustavo Romero <gromero@linux.vnet.ibm.com> writes: > Hi mpe, > > Even after the latest fix for the wild_bctr selftest I'm still getting the > following compilation (actually, an assembling error) because UL is not > understood by the assembler: > > BUILD_TARGET=/home/gromero/git/linux/tools/testing/selftests/powerpc/mm; mkdir -p $BUILD_TARGET; make OUTPUT=$BUILD_TARGET -k -C mm all > make[1]: Entering directory '/home/gromero/git/linux/tools/testing/selftests/powerpc/mm' > gcc -std=gnu99 -O2 -Wall -Werror -DGIT_VERSION='"v4.20-rc1-8-g2c7645b"' -I/home/gromero/git/linux/tools/testing/selftests/powerpc/include -m64 wild_bctr.c ../harness.c -o /home/gromero/git/linux/tools/testing/selftests/powerpc/mm/wild_bctr > /tmp/cctUajlx.s: Assembler messages: > /tmp/cctUajlx.s:270: Error: syntax error; found `U', expected `,' > /tmp/cctUajlx.s:270: Error: junk at end of line: `UL' ... > /tmp/cctUajlx.s:270: Error: syntax error; found `U', expected `,' > /tmp/cctUajlx.s:270: Error: junk at end of line: `UL' > ../../lib.mk:152: recipe for target '/home/gromero/git/linux/tools/testing/selftests/powerpc/mm/wild_bctr' failed > make[1]: *** [/home/gromero/git/linux/tools/testing/selftests/powerpc/mm/wild_bctr] Error 1 > make[1]: Target 'all' not remade because of errors. > make[1]: Leaving directory '/home/gromero/git/linux/tools/testing/selftests/powerpc/mm' > Makefile:39: recipe for target 'mm' failed > make: *** [mm] Error 2 > > For: > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/powerpc/linux.git (powerpc/fixes) > $ git describe > v4.20-rc1-8-g2c7645b > > This is gcc: > $ gcc --version > gcc (Ubuntu/IBM 5.4.0-6ubuntu1~16.04.10) 5.4.0 20160609 > > but it should not make a difference, so I'm wondering if anybody else is > getting the same error too... It seems to make a difference :) I've been building with Ubuntu 7.3.0-27ubuntu1~18.04 and it builds just fine. It looks like binutils 2.27 doesn't accept ULL but binutils 2.28 does. Ah yep, here: https://sourceware.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=binutils-gdb.git;a=commit;h=86b80085c889cd388fa677a5ae9053fd4be3776c > The following trivial workaround can solve it by forcing a type promotion on > the compiler side whilst leaving the macro taken into the asm code without > the UL string: > > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/powerpc/mm/wild_bctr.c b/tools/testing/selftests/powerpc/mm/wild_bctr.c > index 90469a9..d2772f4 100644 > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/powerpc/mm/wild_bctr.c > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/powerpc/mm/wild_bctr.c > @@ -47,8 +47,9 @@ static int ok(void) > return 0; > } > > -#define REG_POISON 0x5a5aUL > -#define POISONED_REG(n) ((REG_POISON << 48) | ((n) << 32) | (REG_POISON << 16) | (n)) > +#define REG_POISON 0x5a5a > +#define POISONED_REG(n) (((REG_POISON+0UL) << 48) | ((n) << 32) | ((REG_POISON+0UL) << 16) | (n)) > > static inline void poison_regs(void) > { > > > Should I contribute such a fix? Yes thanks. cheers
Hi Michael, On 11/13/2018 10:58 PM, Michael Ellerman wrote: > It looks like binutils 2.27 doesn't accept ULL but binutils 2.28 does. > > Ah yep, here: > > https://sourceware.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=binutils-gdb.git;a=commit;h=86b80085c889cd388fa677a5ae9053fd4be3776c > >> The following trivial workaround can solve it by forcing a type promotion on >> the compiler side whilst leaving the macro taken into the asm code without >> the UL string: >> >> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/powerpc/mm/wild_bctr.c b/tools/testing/selftests/powerpc/mm/wild_bctr.c >> index 90469a9..d2772f4 100644 >> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/powerpc/mm/wild_bctr.c >> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/powerpc/mm/wild_bctr.c >> @@ -47,8 +47,9 @@ static int ok(void) >> return 0; >> } >> >> -#define REG_POISON 0x5a5aUL >> -#define POISONED_REG(n) ((REG_POISON << 48) | ((n) << 32) | (REG_POISON << 16) | (n)) >> +#define REG_POISON 0x5a5a >> +#define POISONED_REG(n) (((REG_POISON+0UL) << 48) | ((n) << 32) | ((REG_POISON+0UL) << 16) | (n)) >> >> static inline void poison_regs(void) >> { >> >> >> Should I contribute such a fix? > > Yes thanks. Segher kindly suggested to use explicitly "unsigned long" (thanks!), so I sent a v2 to: https://lists.ozlabs.org/pipermail/linuxppc-dev/2018-November/181434.html Best regards, Gustavo
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/powerpc/mm/wild_bctr.c b/tools/testing/selftests/powerpc/mm/wild_bctr.c index 90469a9..d2772f4 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/powerpc/mm/wild_bctr.c +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/powerpc/mm/wild_bctr.c @@ -47,8 +47,9 @@ static int ok(void) return 0; } -#define REG_POISON 0x5a5aUL -#define POISONED_REG(n) ((REG_POISON << 48) | ((n) << 32) | (REG_POISON << 16) | (n)) +#define REG_POISON 0x5a5a +#define POISONED_REG(n) (((REG_POISON+0UL) << 48) | ((n) << 32) | ((REG_POISON+0UL) << 16) | (n)) static inline void poison_regs(void) {