[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAK7LNAST5y9Khg0BBz6W0mekPpuLPwWa9nPvvVENidWhHZ-avw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 17 May 2019 13:23:55 +0900
From: Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com>
To: Laura Abbott <labbott@...hat.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-arch <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@....fr>,
linux-s390 <linux-s390@...r.kernel.org>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Mathieu Malaterre <malat@...ian.org>, X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>,
Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>,
linux-mips@...r.kernel.org,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
linux-mtd <linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org>,
linuxppc-dev <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [RESEND PATCH v3 04/11] s390/cpacf: mark scpacf_query() as __always_inline
On Fri, May 17, 2019 at 8:01 AM Laura Abbott <labbott@...hat.com> wrote:
>
> On 4/22/19 8:49 PM, Masahiro Yamada wrote:
> > This prepares to move CONFIG_OPTIMIZE_INLINING from x86 to a common
> > place. We need to eliminate potential issues beforehand.
> >
> > If it is enabled for s390, the following error is reported:
> >
> > In file included from arch/s390/crypto/des_s390.c:19:
> > ./arch/s390/include/asm/cpacf.h: In function 'cpacf_query':
> > ./arch/s390/include/asm/cpacf.h:170:2: warning: asm operand 3 probably doesn't match constraints
> > asm volatile(
> > ^~~
> > ./arch/s390/include/asm/cpacf.h:170:2: error: impossible constraint in 'asm'
> >
>
> This also seems to still be broken, again with gcc 9.1.1
>
> BUILDSTDERR: In file included from arch/s390/crypto/prng.c:29:
> BUILDSTDERR: ./arch/s390/include/asm/cpacf.h: In function 'cpacf_query_func':
> BUILDSTDERR: ./arch/s390/include/asm/cpacf.h:170:2: warning: asm operand 3 probably doesn't match constraints
> BUILDSTDERR: 170 | asm volatile(
> BUILDSTDERR: | ^~~
> BUILDSTDERR: ./arch/s390/include/asm/cpacf.h:170:2: error: impossible constraint in 'asm'
>
> I realized we're still carrying a patch to add -fno-section-anchors
> but it's a similar failure to powerpc.
Christophe had already pointed out potential issues for "i" constraint,
and I have fixups in hand:
See
https://lkml.org/lkml/2019/5/3/459
My plan was to send it after all of my base patches
were merged.
This s390 cparf.h is included in the TODO list.
Will fix soon.
Thanks.
--
Best Regards
Masahiro Yamada
Powered by blists - more mailing lists