[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4C02B020.2040103@zytor.com>
Date: Sun, 30 May 2010 11:36:16 -0700
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
Borislav Petkov <borislav.petkov@....com>,
Toralf Förster <toralf.foerster@....de>,
user-mode-linux-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86, hweight: Fix UML boot crash
On 05/30/2010 10:03 AM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> Obviously UML cannot stomach callee reg-saving trickery
> introduced with d61931d89be506372d01a90d1755f6d0a9fafe2d (x86:
> Add optimized popcnt variants) and oopses during boot:
> http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=127522065202435&w=2
>
> Go ahead and fall back to the software hweight* routines on UML.
I actually don't understand why UML can't stomach that... it would work
exactly the same in userspace as in kernel space. The only thing that I
can think of is if UML overrides the CFLAGS including the per-file
CFLAGS, but that would seem to cause all kinds of other issues.
I would also be a lot happier if this was handled in
<asm/arch_hweight.h> than in <asm/bitops.h>. Finally, if UML really
can't handle this, then ARCH_HWEIGHT_CFLAGS should be disabled on UML.
This bothers me, because it really feels like something is fundamentally
broken in UML tryingto track the upstream architecture, and this is just
a bandage.
-hpa
--
H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center
I work for Intel. I don't speak on their behalf.
--
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