[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150720103347.38979f15@mschwide>
Date: Mon, 20 Jul 2015 10:33:47 +0200
From: Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@...ibm.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Cc: Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>, Dave Hansen <dave@...1.net>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] s390, sched: Fix thread_struct move fallout to
__switch_to()
On Mon, 20 Jul 2015 10:20:04 +0200
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> * Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com> wrote:
>
> > Unfortunately not true. It breaks the build on s390 since a couple of
> > displacements used in asm code now get too large:
> >
> > arch/s390/kernel/entry.S:181: Error: operand out of range (0x00000000000018a8 is not between 0x0000000000000000 and 0x0000000000000fff)
> > arch/s390/kernel/entry.S:191: Error: operand out of range (0x00000000000018a8 is not between 0x0000000000000000 and 0x0000000000000fff)
> > arch/s390/kernel/entry.S:423: Error: operand out of range (0x0000000000001924 is not between 0x0000000000000000 and 0x0000000000000fff)
> > arch/s390/kernel/entry.S:437: Error: operand out of range (0x00000000000018e8 is not between 0x0000000000000000 and 0x0000000000000fff)
> > arch/s390/kernel/entry.S:438: Error: operand out of range (0x00000000000018e0 is not between 0x0000000000000000 and 0x0000000000000fff)
> > arch/s390/kernel/entry.S:439: Error: operand out of range (0x00000000000018f0 is not between 0x0000000000000000 and 0x0000000000000fff)
> > make[1]: *** [arch/s390/kernel/entry.o] Error 1
> >
> > Let's see how we can fix this.
>
> Sorry about this!
>
> So I looked at the __switch_to() assembly, and the main complication appears to be
> that we have two uses of 'prev':
>
> lg %r4,__THREAD_info(%r2) # get thread_info of prev
>
>
> stg %r15,__THREAD_ksp(%r2) # store kernel stack of prev
>
> the __THREAD_info offset is best expressed relative to task_struct - the
> __THREAD_ksp offset is best expressed relative to thread_struct.
>
> I.e. I think the best fix would be to extend the signature of s390's __switch_to()
> from (prev,next) to (prev,next,prev_thread,next_thread).
>
> Is the C parameter mapping r2,r3,r4,r5? If yes then the patch below should do the
> trick. (Utterly untested.)
>
> Note:
>
> - I renamed __THREAD_info to __TASK_thread_info, to better separate task_struct
> and thread_struct offsets syntactically and visually.
>
> - I removed __THREAD_mm_segment which is unused
>
> I also looked at fixing pgm_check_handler(), but my s390-fu gave up completely on
> that one: task_struct is in 'r14', but this is a hardware entry function it
> appears. So to fix it we'd have to pick a temporary register, put thread_struct
> pointer into it, and fix up these offsets:
>
> arch/s390/kernel/asm-offsets.c: DEFINE(__THREAD_per_address, offsetof(struct task_struct, thread.per_event.address));
> arch/s390/kernel/asm-offsets.c: DEFINE(__THREAD_per_paid, offsetof(struct task_struct, thread.per_event.paid));
> arch/s390/kernel/asm-offsets.c: DEFINE(__THREAD_trap_tdb, offsetof(struct task_struct, thread.trap_tdb));
>
> to be thread_struct relative.
Just use the patch I've sent. No worries :-)
--
blue skies,
Martin.
"Reality continues to ruin my life." - Calvin.
--
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