[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20111214204225.7c8ec86c@sf.home>
Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2011 20:42:25 +0300
From: Sergei Trofimovich <slyich@...il.com>
To: Rob Landley <rob@...dley.net>
Cc: Aboriginal Linux <aboriginal@...ts.landley.net>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, davem@...emloft.net, tytso@....edu,
sparclinux@...r.kernel.org, Jakub Jelinek <jakub@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: Sparc-32 doesn't work in 3.1.
[ CCed Jakub ]
>>> Boot time fixup v1.6. 4/Mar/98 Jakub Jelinek (jj@...ra.linux.cz).
>>> Patching kernel for srmmu[Fujitsu TurboSparc]/iommu
>>> Fixup i f029ddfc doesn't refer to a valid instruction at
>>> f00de648[95eea000]
>>> halt, power off
> I put the broken image up at http://landley.net/sparc-image for the
> moment, but if you build 3.1 with the attached .config and the toolchain
> mentioned last time, it should reproduce for you. It's 100% reliable
> for me...
Nice! With this config it breaks for me on your and mine toolchains.
The offending function is ext4_kvmalloc (and similar ext4_kvzalloc).
The usual relocation in sparc looks like a pair of instructions loading
two pats of address in 2 instructions:
Like that:
> sethi %hi(ext4_fill_super), %o4 !, tmp113
> or %o4, %lo(ext4_fill_super), %o4 ! tmp113,, tmp28
In our case relocatable symbol sits in tail call, so %lo part is in "unusual"
RESTORE instruction:
> ext4_kvmalloc:
...
> sethi %hi(___i_page_kernel), %i2 !, tmp112
> call __vmalloc, 0 !
> restore %i2, %lo(___i_page_kernel), %o2 ! tmp112,,
...
David: is this code correct? Or it's a compiler bug? I am sparc32 newbie.
(C source and asm sources of function are in [1])
I think this kind of code is generated only in -Os.
So to workaround it I tried this hack:
> --- a/fs/ext4/super.c
> +++ b/fs/ext4/super.c
> ret = kmalloc(size, flags);
> if (!ret)
> ret = __vmalloc(size, flags, PAGE_KERNEL);
> +
> + asm __volatile__("nop":::"memory");
> +
> return ret;
> }
(for both ext4_kvmalloc / ext4_kvzalloc. Attached workaround as a patch.)
It forces compiler to geterate "usual" pattern for relocation.
I think of 2 solutions:
1. trying to fix sparc/boot/btfixupprep.c and arch/sparc/mm/btfixup.c
to distinct HI22 and LO10 relocations as different ones.
Right now they are merged into one 'i' type and rely on instruction heuristics to fix it.
2. Add a hack to arch/sparc/mm/btfixup.c to recognize restore instruction as well
Any others?
Hope that helps.
[1]:
void *ext4_kvmalloc(size_t size, gfp_t flags)
{
void *ret;
ret = kmalloc(size, flags);
if (!ret)
ret = __vmalloc(size, flags, PAGE_KERNEL);
return ret;
}
.global ext4_kvmalloc
.type ext4_kvmalloc, #function
.proc 0120
ext4_kvmalloc:
save %sp, -96, %sp !
mov %i0, %o0 ! size,
call __kmalloc, 0 !,
mov %i1, %o1 ! flags,
cmp %o0, 0 ! ret,
bne .LL274 !
sethi %hi(___i_page_kernel), %i2 !, tmp112
call __vmalloc, 0 !
restore %i2, %lo(___i_page_kernel), %o2 ! tmp112,,
.LL274:
jmp %i7+8
restore %g0, %o0, %o0 ! ret,
.size ext4_kvmalloc, .-ext4_kvmalloc
--
Sergei
View attachment "pessimizing-hack.patch" of type "text/x-patch" (555 bytes)
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (199 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists