| Message ID | 20220502164830.1622191-1-iii@linux.ibm.com |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
| Series | tests/tcg/s390x: Use a different PCRel32 notation in branch-relative-long.c | expand |
On 02/05/2022 18.48, Ilya Leoshkevich wrote: > Binutils >=2.37 and Clang do not accept (. - 0x100000000) PCRel32 > constants. While this looks like a bug that needs fixing, use a > different notation (-0x100000000) as a workaround. > > Reported-by: Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com> > Signed-off-by: Ilya Leoshkevich <iii@linux.ibm.com> > --- > tests/tcg/s390x/branch-relative-long.c | 4 ++-- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/tests/tcg/s390x/branch-relative-long.c b/tests/tcg/s390x/branch-relative-long.c > index 94219afcad..8ce9f1c2e5 100644 > --- a/tests/tcg/s390x/branch-relative-long.c > +++ b/tests/tcg/s390x/branch-relative-long.c > @@ -13,8 +13,8 @@ > #_name "_end:\n"); > > DEFINE_ASM(br_r14, "br %r14"); > -DEFINE_ASM(brasl_r0, "brasl %r0,.-0x100000000"); > -DEFINE_ASM(brcl_0xf, "brcl 0xf,.-0x100000000"); > +DEFINE_ASM(brasl_r0, "brasl %r0,-0x100000000"); > +DEFINE_ASM(brcl_0xf, "brcl 0xf,-0x100000000"); Works for me, thanks! Tested-by: Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com> and queued to my s390x-next branch: https://gitlab.com/thuth/qemu/-/commits/s390x-next/ Thomas
On 03/05/2022 11.02, Thomas Huth wrote: > On 02/05/2022 18.48, Ilya Leoshkevich wrote: >> Binutils >=2.37 and Clang do not accept (. - 0x100000000) PCRel32 >> constants. While this looks like a bug that needs fixing, use a >> different notation (-0x100000000) as a workaround. >> >> Reported-by: Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com> >> Signed-off-by: Ilya Leoshkevich <iii@linux.ibm.com> >> --- >> tests/tcg/s390x/branch-relative-long.c | 4 ++-- >> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/tests/tcg/s390x/branch-relative-long.c >> b/tests/tcg/s390x/branch-relative-long.c >> index 94219afcad..8ce9f1c2e5 100644 >> --- a/tests/tcg/s390x/branch-relative-long.c >> +++ b/tests/tcg/s390x/branch-relative-long.c >> @@ -13,8 +13,8 @@ >> #_name "_end:\n"); >> DEFINE_ASM(br_r14, "br %r14"); >> -DEFINE_ASM(brasl_r0, "brasl %r0,.-0x100000000"); >> -DEFINE_ASM(brcl_0xf, "brcl 0xf,.-0x100000000"); >> +DEFINE_ASM(brasl_r0, "brasl %r0,-0x100000000"); >> +DEFINE_ASM(brcl_0xf, "brcl 0xf,-0x100000000"); > > Works for me, thanks! Sorry, I spoke too soon - it compiles fine, and also runs fine when I run it natively, but when I run it through "qemu-s390x", it crashes... does that work for you? Thomas
On Tue, 2022-05-03 at 21:26 +0200, Thomas Huth wrote: > On 03/05/2022 11.02, Thomas Huth wrote: > > On 02/05/2022 18.48, Ilya Leoshkevich wrote: > > > Binutils >=2.37 and Clang do not accept (. - 0x100000000) PCRel32 > > > constants. While this looks like a bug that needs fixing, use a > > > different notation (-0x100000000) as a workaround. > > > > > > Reported-by: Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com> > > > Signed-off-by: Ilya Leoshkevich <iii@linux.ibm.com> > > > --- > > > tests/tcg/s390x/branch-relative-long.c | 4 ++-- > > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/tests/tcg/s390x/branch-relative-long.c > > > b/tests/tcg/s390x/branch-relative-long.c > > > index 94219afcad..8ce9f1c2e5 100644 > > > --- a/tests/tcg/s390x/branch-relative-long.c > > > +++ b/tests/tcg/s390x/branch-relative-long.c > > > @@ -13,8 +13,8 @@ > > > #_name "_end:\n"); > > > DEFINE_ASM(br_r14, "br %r14"); > > > -DEFINE_ASM(brasl_r0, "brasl %r0,.-0x100000000"); > > > -DEFINE_ASM(brcl_0xf, "brcl 0xf,.-0x100000000"); > > > +DEFINE_ASM(brasl_r0, "brasl %r0,-0x100000000"); > > > +DEFINE_ASM(brcl_0xf, "brcl 0xf,-0x100000000"); > > > > Works for me, thanks! > > Sorry, I spoke too soon - it compiles fine, and also runs fine when I > run it > natively, but when I run it through "qemu-s390x", it crashes... does > that > work for you? Hi, yes, I just double-checked - it works fine for me. Could you please share the resulting test binary?
On 04/05/2022 00.46, Ilya Leoshkevich wrote: > On Tue, 2022-05-03 at 21:26 +0200, Thomas Huth wrote: >> On 03/05/2022 11.02, Thomas Huth wrote: >>> On 02/05/2022 18.48, Ilya Leoshkevich wrote: >>>> Binutils >=2.37 and Clang do not accept (. - 0x100000000) PCRel32 >>>> constants. While this looks like a bug that needs fixing, use a >>>> different notation (-0x100000000) as a workaround. >>>> >>>> Reported-by: Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com> >>>> Signed-off-by: Ilya Leoshkevich <iii@linux.ibm.com> >>>> --- >>>> tests/tcg/s390x/branch-relative-long.c | 4 ++-- >>>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/tests/tcg/s390x/branch-relative-long.c >>>> b/tests/tcg/s390x/branch-relative-long.c >>>> index 94219afcad..8ce9f1c2e5 100644 >>>> --- a/tests/tcg/s390x/branch-relative-long.c >>>> +++ b/tests/tcg/s390x/branch-relative-long.c >>>> @@ -13,8 +13,8 @@ >>>> #_name "_end:\n"); >>>> DEFINE_ASM(br_r14, "br %r14"); >>>> -DEFINE_ASM(brasl_r0, "brasl %r0,.-0x100000000"); >>>> -DEFINE_ASM(brcl_0xf, "brcl 0xf,.-0x100000000"); >>>> +DEFINE_ASM(brasl_r0, "brasl %r0,-0x100000000"); >>>> +DEFINE_ASM(brcl_0xf, "brcl 0xf,-0x100000000"); >>> >>> Works for me, thanks! >> >> Sorry, I spoke too soon - it compiles fine, and also runs fine when I >> run it >> natively, but when I run it through "qemu-s390x", it crashes... does >> that >> work for you? > > Hi, yes, I just double-checked - it works fine for me. > Could you please share the resulting test binary? Sure, here it is: https://people.redhat.com/~thuth/data/branch-relative-long Thomas
On Wed, 2022-05-04 at 09:01 +0200, Thomas Huth wrote: > On 04/05/2022 00.46, Ilya Leoshkevich wrote: > > On Tue, 2022-05-03 at 21:26 +0200, Thomas Huth wrote: > > > On 03/05/2022 11.02, Thomas Huth wrote: > > > > On 02/05/2022 18.48, Ilya Leoshkevich wrote: > > > > > Binutils >=2.37 and Clang do not accept (. - 0x100000000) > > > > > PCRel32 > > > > > constants. While this looks like a bug that needs fixing, use > > > > > a > > > > > different notation (-0x100000000) as a workaround. > > > > > > > > > > Reported-by: Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com> > > > > > Signed-off-by: Ilya Leoshkevich <iii@linux.ibm.com> > > > > > --- > > > > > tests/tcg/s390x/branch-relative-long.c | 4 ++-- > > > > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/tests/tcg/s390x/branch-relative-long.c > > > > > b/tests/tcg/s390x/branch-relative-long.c > > > > > index 94219afcad..8ce9f1c2e5 100644 > > > > > --- a/tests/tcg/s390x/branch-relative-long.c > > > > > +++ b/tests/tcg/s390x/branch-relative-long.c > > > > > @@ -13,8 +13,8 @@ > > > > > #_name "_end:\n"); > > > > > DEFINE_ASM(br_r14, "br %r14"); > > > > > -DEFINE_ASM(brasl_r0, "brasl %r0,.-0x100000000"); > > > > > -DEFINE_ASM(brcl_0xf, "brcl 0xf,.-0x100000000"); > > > > > +DEFINE_ASM(brasl_r0, "brasl %r0,-0x100000000"); > > > > > +DEFINE_ASM(brcl_0xf, "brcl 0xf,-0x100000000"); > > > > > > > > Works for me, thanks! > > > > > > Sorry, I spoke too soon - it compiles fine, and also runs fine > > > when I > > > run it > > > natively, but when I run it through "qemu-s390x", it crashes... > > > does > > > that > > > work for you? > > > > Hi, yes, I just double-checked - it works fine for me. > > Could you please share the resulting test binary? > > > Sure, here it is: > > https://people.redhat.com/~thuth/data/branch-relative-long > > Thomas Your binary worked fine for me. QEMU commit 2e3408b3cc7de4e87a9adafc8c19bfce3abec947, x86_64 host, configured with --target-list=s390x-linux-user.
On 04/05/2022 11.07, Ilya Leoshkevich wrote: > On Wed, 2022-05-04 at 09:01 +0200, Thomas Huth wrote: >> On 04/05/2022 00.46, Ilya Leoshkevich wrote: >>> On Tue, 2022-05-03 at 21:26 +0200, Thomas Huth wrote: >>>> On 03/05/2022 11.02, Thomas Huth wrote: >>>>> On 02/05/2022 18.48, Ilya Leoshkevich wrote: >>>>>> Binutils >=2.37 and Clang do not accept (. - 0x100000000) >>>>>> PCRel32 >>>>>> constants. While this looks like a bug that needs fixing, use >>>>>> a >>>>>> different notation (-0x100000000) as a workaround. >>>>>> >>>>>> Reported-by: Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com> >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Ilya Leoshkevich <iii@linux.ibm.com> >>>>>> --- >>>>>> tests/tcg/s390x/branch-relative-long.c | 4 ++-- >>>>>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >>>>>> >>>>>> diff --git a/tests/tcg/s390x/branch-relative-long.c >>>>>> b/tests/tcg/s390x/branch-relative-long.c >>>>>> index 94219afcad..8ce9f1c2e5 100644 >>>>>> --- a/tests/tcg/s390x/branch-relative-long.c >>>>>> +++ b/tests/tcg/s390x/branch-relative-long.c >>>>>> @@ -13,8 +13,8 @@ >>>>>> #_name "_end:\n"); >>>>>> DEFINE_ASM(br_r14, "br %r14"); >>>>>> -DEFINE_ASM(brasl_r0, "brasl %r0,.-0x100000000"); >>>>>> -DEFINE_ASM(brcl_0xf, "brcl 0xf,.-0x100000000"); >>>>>> +DEFINE_ASM(brasl_r0, "brasl %r0,-0x100000000"); >>>>>> +DEFINE_ASM(brcl_0xf, "brcl 0xf,-0x100000000"); >>>>> >>>>> Works for me, thanks! >>>> >>>> Sorry, I spoke too soon - it compiles fine, and also runs fine >>>> when I >>>> run it >>>> natively, but when I run it through "qemu-s390x", it crashes... >>>> does >>>> that >>>> work for you? >>> >>> Hi, yes, I just double-checked - it works fine for me. >>> Could you please share the resulting test binary? >> >> >> Sure, here it is: >> >> https://people.redhat.com/~thuth/data/branch-relative-long >> >> Thomas > > Your binary worked fine for me. > > QEMU commit 2e3408b3cc7de4e87a9adafc8c19bfce3abec947, > x86_64 host, Oh, well, now that you've mentioned it: I was running "make check-tcg" on a s390x host. It works fine on a x86, indeed. So the new problem is likely in the s390x TCG host backend... Richard, could you maybe have a look? Thomas
On Wed, 2022-05-04 at 11:14 +0200, Thomas Huth wrote: > On 04/05/2022 11.07, Ilya Leoshkevich wrote: > > On Wed, 2022-05-04 at 09:01 +0200, Thomas Huth wrote: > > > On 04/05/2022 00.46, Ilya Leoshkevich wrote: > > > > On Tue, 2022-05-03 at 21:26 +0200, Thomas Huth wrote: > > > > > On 03/05/2022 11.02, Thomas Huth wrote: > > > > > > On 02/05/2022 18.48, Ilya Leoshkevich wrote: > > > > > > > Binutils >=2.37 and Clang do not accept (. - 0x100000000) > > > > > > > PCRel32 > > > > > > > constants. While this looks like a bug that needs fixing, > > > > > > > use > > > > > > > a > > > > > > > different notation (-0x100000000) as a workaround. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Reported-by: Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com> > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Ilya Leoshkevich <iii@linux.ibm.com> > > > > > > > --- > > > > > > > tests/tcg/s390x/branch-relative-long.c | 4 ++-- > > > > > > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/tests/tcg/s390x/branch-relative-long.c > > > > > > > b/tests/tcg/s390x/branch-relative-long.c > > > > > > > index 94219afcad..8ce9f1c2e5 100644 > > > > > > > --- a/tests/tcg/s390x/branch-relative-long.c > > > > > > > +++ b/tests/tcg/s390x/branch-relative-long.c > > > > > > > @@ -13,8 +13,8 @@ > > > > > > > #_name "_end:\n"); > > > > > > > DEFINE_ASM(br_r14, "br %r14"); > > > > > > > -DEFINE_ASM(brasl_r0, "brasl %r0,.-0x100000000"); > > > > > > > -DEFINE_ASM(brcl_0xf, "brcl 0xf,.-0x100000000"); > > > > > > > +DEFINE_ASM(brasl_r0, "brasl %r0,-0x100000000"); > > > > > > > +DEFINE_ASM(brcl_0xf, "brcl 0xf,-0x100000000"); > > > > > > > > > > > > Works for me, thanks! > > > > > > > > > > Sorry, I spoke too soon - it compiles fine, and also runs > > > > > fine > > > > > when I > > > > > run it > > > > > natively, but when I run it through "qemu-s390x", it > > > > > crashes... > > > > > does > > > > > that > > > > > work for you? > > > > > > > > Hi, yes, I just double-checked - it works fine for me. > > > > Could you please share the resulting test binary? > > > > > > > > > Sure, here it is: > > > > > > https://people.redhat.com/~thuth/data/branch-relative-long > > > > > > Thomas > > > > Your binary worked fine for me. > > > > QEMU commit 2e3408b3cc7de4e87a9adafc8c19bfce3abec947, > > x86_64 host, > > Oh, well, now that you've mentioned it: I was running "make check- > tcg" on a > s390x host. It works fine on a x86, indeed. So the new problem is > likely in > the s390x TCG host backend... Richard, could you maybe have a look? > > Thomas It worked fine on a s390x host for me as well. Can this be related to the large mmap() that the test performs?
On 04/05/2022 11.37, Ilya Leoshkevich wrote: > On Wed, 2022-05-04 at 11:14 +0200, Thomas Huth wrote: >> On 04/05/2022 11.07, Ilya Leoshkevich wrote: >>> On Wed, 2022-05-04 at 09:01 +0200, Thomas Huth wrote: >>>> On 04/05/2022 00.46, Ilya Leoshkevich wrote: >>>>> On Tue, 2022-05-03 at 21:26 +0200, Thomas Huth wrote: >>>>>> On 03/05/2022 11.02, Thomas Huth wrote: >>>>>>> On 02/05/2022 18.48, Ilya Leoshkevich wrote: >>>>>>>> Binutils >=2.37 and Clang do not accept (. - 0x100000000) >>>>>>>> PCRel32 >>>>>>>> constants. While this looks like a bug that needs fixing, >>>>>>>> use >>>>>>>> a >>>>>>>> different notation (-0x100000000) as a workaround. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Reported-by: Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com> >>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Ilya Leoshkevich <iii@linux.ibm.com> >>>>>>>> --- >>>>>>>> tests/tcg/s390x/branch-relative-long.c | 4 ++-- >>>>>>>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> diff --git a/tests/tcg/s390x/branch-relative-long.c >>>>>>>> b/tests/tcg/s390x/branch-relative-long.c >>>>>>>> index 94219afcad..8ce9f1c2e5 100644 >>>>>>>> --- a/tests/tcg/s390x/branch-relative-long.c >>>>>>>> +++ b/tests/tcg/s390x/branch-relative-long.c >>>>>>>> @@ -13,8 +13,8 @@ >>>>>>>> #_name "_end:\n"); >>>>>>>> DEFINE_ASM(br_r14, "br %r14"); >>>>>>>> -DEFINE_ASM(brasl_r0, "brasl %r0,.-0x100000000"); >>>>>>>> -DEFINE_ASM(brcl_0xf, "brcl 0xf,.-0x100000000"); >>>>>>>> +DEFINE_ASM(brasl_r0, "brasl %r0,-0x100000000"); >>>>>>>> +DEFINE_ASM(brcl_0xf, "brcl 0xf,-0x100000000"); >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Works for me, thanks! >>>>>> >>>>>> Sorry, I spoke too soon - it compiles fine, and also runs >>>>>> fine >>>>>> when I >>>>>> run it >>>>>> natively, but when I run it through "qemu-s390x", it >>>>>> crashes... >>>>>> does >>>>>> that >>>>>> work for you? >>>>> >>>>> Hi, yes, I just double-checked - it works fine for me. >>>>> Could you please share the resulting test binary? >>>> >>>> >>>> Sure, here it is: >>>> >>>> https://people.redhat.com/~thuth/data/branch-relative-long >>>> >>>> Thomas >>> >>> Your binary worked fine for me. >>> >>> QEMU commit 2e3408b3cc7de4e87a9adafc8c19bfce3abec947, >>> x86_64 host, >> >> Oh, well, now that you've mentioned it: I was running "make check- >> tcg" on a >> s390x host. It works fine on a x86, indeed. So the new problem is >> likely in >> the s390x TCG host backend... Richard, could you maybe have a look? >> >> Thomas > > It worked fine on a s390x host for me as well. Weird ... Did you compile qemu-s390x itself with Clang or with GCC? I just discovered that the crash also only happens if I compile qemu-s390x with Clang - there is no crash when I compile it with GCC. > Can this be related to the large mmap() that the test performs? It works when I compile the test with GCC instead of Clang - so I assume that the problem is somewhere else... Thomas
On Wed, 2022-05-04 at 12:46 +0200, Thomas Huth wrote: > On 04/05/2022 11.37, Ilya Leoshkevich wrote: > > On Wed, 2022-05-04 at 11:14 +0200, Thomas Huth wrote: > > > On 04/05/2022 11.07, Ilya Leoshkevich wrote: > > > > On Wed, 2022-05-04 at 09:01 +0200, Thomas Huth wrote: > > > > > On 04/05/2022 00.46, Ilya Leoshkevich wrote: > > > > > > On Tue, 2022-05-03 at 21:26 +0200, Thomas Huth wrote: > > > > > > > On 03/05/2022 11.02, Thomas Huth wrote: > > > > > > > > On 02/05/2022 18.48, Ilya Leoshkevich wrote: > > > > > > > > > Binutils >=2.37 and Clang do not accept (. - > > > > > > > > > 0x100000000) > > > > > > > > > PCRel32 > > > > > > > > > constants. While this looks like a bug that needs > > > > > > > > > fixing, > > > > > > > > > use > > > > > > > > > a > > > > > > > > > different notation (-0x100000000) as a workaround. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Reported-by: Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com> > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Ilya Leoshkevich <iii@linux.ibm.com> > > > > > > > > > --- > > > > > > > > > tests/tcg/s390x/branch-relative-long.c | 4 ++-- > > > > > > > > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/tests/tcg/s390x/branch-relative-long.c > > > > > > > > > b/tests/tcg/s390x/branch-relative-long.c > > > > > > > > > index 94219afcad..8ce9f1c2e5 100644 > > > > > > > > > --- a/tests/tcg/s390x/branch-relative-long.c > > > > > > > > > +++ b/tests/tcg/s390x/branch-relative-long.c > > > > > > > > > @@ -13,8 +13,8 @@ > > > > > > > > > #_name "_end:\n"); > > > > > > > > > DEFINE_ASM(br_r14, "br %r14"); > > > > > > > > > -DEFINE_ASM(brasl_r0, "brasl %r0,.-0x100000000"); > > > > > > > > > -DEFINE_ASM(brcl_0xf, "brcl 0xf,.-0x100000000"); > > > > > > > > > +DEFINE_ASM(brasl_r0, "brasl %r0,-0x100000000"); > > > > > > > > > +DEFINE_ASM(brcl_0xf, "brcl 0xf,-0x100000000"); > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Works for me, thanks! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sorry, I spoke too soon - it compiles fine, and also runs > > > > > > > fine > > > > > > > when I > > > > > > > run it > > > > > > > natively, but when I run it through "qemu-s390x", it > > > > > > > crashes... > > > > > > > does > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > work for you? > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi, yes, I just double-checked - it works fine for me. > > > > > > Could you please share the resulting test binary? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sure, here it is: > > > > > > > > > > https://people.redhat.com/~thuth/data/branch-relative-long > > > > > > > > > > Thomas > > > > > > > > Your binary worked fine for me. > > > > > > > > QEMU commit 2e3408b3cc7de4e87a9adafc8c19bfce3abec947, > > > > x86_64 host, > > > > > > Oh, well, now that you've mentioned it: I was running "make > > > check- > > > tcg" on a > > > s390x host. It works fine on a x86, indeed. So the new problem is > > > likely in > > > the s390x TCG host backend... Richard, could you maybe have a > > > look? > > > > > > Thomas > > > > It worked fine on a s390x host for me as well. > > Weird ... Did you compile qemu-s390x itself with Clang or with GCC? I > just > discovered that the crash also only happens if I compile qemu-s390x > with > Clang - there is no crash when I compile it with GCC. > > > Can this be related to the large mmap() that the test performs? > > It works when I compile the test with GCC instead of Clang - so I > assume > that the problem is somewhere else... > > Thomas > I see, I just used your test with the gcc-built QEMU. With clang-built QEMU it hangs for me on the s390x host.
On Wed, 2022-05-04 at 12:51 +0200, Ilya Leoshkevich wrote: > On Wed, 2022-05-04 at 12:46 +0200, Thomas Huth wrote: > > On 04/05/2022 11.37, Ilya Leoshkevich wrote: > > > On Wed, 2022-05-04 at 11:14 +0200, Thomas Huth wrote: > > > > On 04/05/2022 11.07, Ilya Leoshkevich wrote: > > > > > On Wed, 2022-05-04 at 09:01 +0200, Thomas Huth wrote: > > > > > > On 04/05/2022 00.46, Ilya Leoshkevich wrote: > > > > > > > On Tue, 2022-05-03 at 21:26 +0200, Thomas Huth wrote: > > > > > > > > On 03/05/2022 11.02, Thomas Huth wrote: > > > > > > > > > On 02/05/2022 18.48, Ilya Leoshkevich wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Binutils >=2.37 and Clang do not accept (. - > > > > > > > > > > 0x100000000) > > > > > > > > > > PCRel32 > > > > > > > > > > constants. While this looks like a bug that needs > > > > > > > > > > fixing, > > > > > > > > > > use > > > > > > > > > > a > > > > > > > > > > different notation (-0x100000000) as a workaround. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Reported-by: Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com> > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Ilya Leoshkevich <iii@linux.ibm.com> > > > > > > > > > > --- > > > > > > > > > > tests/tcg/s390x/branch-relative-long.c | 4 ++- > > > > > > > > > > - > > > > > > > > > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(- > > > > > > > > > > ) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/tests/tcg/s390x/branch-relative-long.c > > > > > > > > > > b/tests/tcg/s390x/branch-relative-long.c > > > > > > > > > > index 94219afcad..8ce9f1c2e5 100644 > > > > > > > > > > --- a/tests/tcg/s390x/branch-relative-long.c > > > > > > > > > > +++ b/tests/tcg/s390x/branch-relative-long.c > > > > > > > > > > @@ -13,8 +13,8 @@ > > > > > > > > > > #_name "_end:\n"); > > > > > > > > > > DEFINE_ASM(br_r14, "br %r14"); > > > > > > > > > > -DEFINE_ASM(brasl_r0, "brasl %r0,.-0x100000000"); > > > > > > > > > > -DEFINE_ASM(brcl_0xf, "brcl 0xf,.-0x100000000"); > > > > > > > > > > +DEFINE_ASM(brasl_r0, "brasl %r0,-0x100000000"); > > > > > > > > > > +DEFINE_ASM(brcl_0xf, "brcl 0xf,-0x100000000"); > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Works for me, thanks! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sorry, I spoke too soon - it compiles fine, and also > > > > > > > > runs > > > > > > > > fine > > > > > > > > when I > > > > > > > > run it > > > > > > > > natively, but when I run it through "qemu-s390x", it > > > > > > > > crashes... > > > > > > > > does > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > work for you? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi, yes, I just double-checked - it works fine for me. > > > > > > > Could you please share the resulting test binary? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sure, here it is: > > > > > > > > > > > > https://people.redhat.com/~thuth/data/branch-relative-long > > > > > > > > > > > > Thomas > > > > > > > > > > Your binary worked fine for me. > > > > > > > > > > QEMU commit 2e3408b3cc7de4e87a9adafc8c19bfce3abec947, > > > > > x86_64 host, > > > > > > > > Oh, well, now that you've mentioned it: I was running "make > > > > check- > > > > tcg" on a > > > > s390x host. It works fine on a x86, indeed. So the new problem > > > > is > > > > likely in > > > > the s390x TCG host backend... Richard, could you maybe have a > > > > look? > > > > > > > > Thomas > > > > > > It worked fine on a s390x host for me as well. > > > > Weird ... Did you compile qemu-s390x itself with Clang or with GCC? > > I > > just > > discovered that the crash also only happens if I compile qemu-s390x > > with > > Clang - there is no crash when I compile it with GCC. > > > > > Can this be related to the large mmap() that the test performs? > > > > It works when I compile the test with GCC instead of Clang - so I > > assume > > that the problem is somewhere else... > > > > Thomas > > > > I see, I just used your test with the gcc-built QEMU. > With clang-built QEMU it hangs for me on the s390x host. Actually I've been somewhat impatient, it's not a hang, but rather quite a long wait followed by a SEGV. So I debugged this a bit, and apparently what happens is: - The test zeroes out a code page with exrl+xc. - do_helper_xc() is called. Clang generates exrl+xc combination there as well. - Since there already exists a TB for the code in question, its page is read-only. SIGSEGV happens. - host_signal_handler() calls host_signal_write() and it doesn't recognize exrl as a write. Therefore page_unprotect() is not called and the signal is forwarded to the test. The following does indeed help: --- a/linux-user/include/host/s390/host-signal.h +++ b/linux-user/include/host/s390/host-signal.h @@ -61,6 +61,12 @@ static inline bool host_signal_write(siginfo_t *info, host_sigcontext *uc) return true; } break; + case 0xc6: /* RIL-b format insns */ + switch (pinsn[0] & 0xf) { + case 0x0: /* EXRL */ + return true; + } + break; case 0xc8: /* SSF format insns */ switch (pinsn[0] & 0xf) { case 0x2: /* CSST */ While there can be false positives here, it shouldn't hurt: for those, page_unprotect() will recognize that the page in question does not have a corresponding TB and nothing will happen.
diff --git a/tests/tcg/s390x/branch-relative-long.c b/tests/tcg/s390x/branch-relative-long.c index 94219afcad..8ce9f1c2e5 100644 --- a/tests/tcg/s390x/branch-relative-long.c +++ b/tests/tcg/s390x/branch-relative-long.c @@ -13,8 +13,8 @@ #_name "_end:\n"); DEFINE_ASM(br_r14, "br %r14"); -DEFINE_ASM(brasl_r0, "brasl %r0,.-0x100000000"); -DEFINE_ASM(brcl_0xf, "brcl 0xf,.-0x100000000"); +DEFINE_ASM(brasl_r0, "brasl %r0,-0x100000000"); +DEFINE_ASM(brcl_0xf, "brcl 0xf,-0x100000000"); struct test { const char *code;
Binutils >=2.37 and Clang do not accept (. - 0x100000000) PCRel32 constants. While this looks like a bug that needs fixing, use a different notation (-0x100000000) as a workaround. Reported-by: Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com> Signed-off-by: Ilya Leoshkevich <iii@linux.ibm.com> --- tests/tcg/s390x/branch-relative-long.c | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)