[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <48217674.8080903@goop.org>
Date: Wed, 07 May 2008 10:29:24 +0100
From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>
To: Segher Boessenkool <segher@...nel.crashing.org>
CC: Robert Hancock <hancockr@...w.ca>,
Christian Kujau <lists@...dbynature.de>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Subject: Re: undefined reference to __udivdi3 (gcc-4.3)
Segher Boessenkool wrote:
>> I assume it's one or both of these loops in arch/x86/xen/time.c
>> do_stolen_accounting() that are being optimized into a divide which
>> generates a libgcc call:
>>
>> while (stolen >= NS_PER_TICK) {
>> ticks++;
>> stolen -= NS_PER_TICK;
>> }
>>
>> or
>>
>> while (blocked >= NS_PER_TICK) {
>> ticks++;
>> blocked -= NS_PER_TICK;
>> }
>
> That looks plausible.
Yep. Probably both.
>> Not sure if that is a sustainable fix, though..
>
> It should be. The asm() arg tells GCC that the asm() could modify
> "ns" in some way, so GCC cannot optimise away the loop, since it
> doesn't have the required info about the induction variable to do
> that.
Yep, it's guaranteed to work. But it's an ugly hack to work around an
over-enthusiastic compiler, and so is an inherent maintainability burden.
I think the correct fix here is to introduce an iter_div_rem() function
which contains this hack, so we can avoid scattering it all over the
place. I'll cook up a patch.
J
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists