| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2022 11:40:47 -0500
From: Alex Deucher <alexdeucher@...il.com>
To: Felix Kuehling <felix.kuehling@....com>
Cc: David Gow <davidgow@...gle.com>, Jeff Dike <jdike@...toit.com>,
Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>,
Anton Ivanov <anton.ivanov@...bridgegreys.com>,
Shuah Khan <skhan@...uxfoundation.org>,
Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@...gle.com>,
Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>,
linux-rdma <linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org>, X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>,
linux-um@...ts.infradead.org, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Maling list - DRI developers
<dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
amd-gfx list <amd-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, kunit-dev@...glegroups.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] drm/amdgpu: Fix compilation under UML
On Fri, Feb 18, 2022 at 11:39 AM Felix Kuehling <felix.kuehling@....com> wrote:
>
>
> Am 2022-02-18 um 02:57 schrieb David Gow:
> > From: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>
> >
> > cpuinfo_x86 and its associated macros are not available under ARCH=um,
> > even though CONFIG_X86_64 is defined.
> >
> > This patch (and discussion) were originally posted here:
> > https://lkml.org/lkml/2022/1/24/1547
> >
> > This produces the following build errors:
> > ../drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/../amdkfd/kfd_topology.c:1556:9: note: in expansion of macro ‘cpu_data’
> > return cpu_data(first_cpu_of_numa_node).apicid;
> > ^~~~~~~~
> > ../drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/../amdkfd/kfd_topology.c:1560:1: error: control reaches end of non-void function [-Werror=return-type]
> >
> > ../drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/../amdkfd/kfd_crat.c: In function ‘kfd_fill_iolink_info_for_cpu’:
> > ../arch/um/include/asm/processor-generic.h:103:19: error: called object is not a function or function pointer
> > #define cpu_data (&boot_cpu_data)
> > ~^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > ../drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/../amdkfd/kfd_crat.c:1688:27: note: in expansion of macro ‘cpu_data’
> > struct cpuinfo_x86 *c = &cpu_data(0);
> > ^~~~~~~~
> > ../drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/../amdkfd/kfd_crat.c:1691:7: error: dereferencing pointer to incomplete type ‘struct cpuinfo_x86’
> > if (c->x86_vendor == X86_VENDOR_AMD)
> > ^~
> > ../drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/../amdkfd/kfd_crat.c:1691:23: error: ‘X86_VENDOR_AMD’ undeclared (first use in this function); did you mean ‘X86_VENDOR_ANY’?
> > if (c->x86_vendor == X86_VENDOR_AMD)
> > ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > X86_VENDOR_ANY
> >
> > ../drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/../amdkfd/kfd_crat.c: In function ‘kfd_create_vcrat_image_cpu’:
> > ../drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/../amdkfd/kfd_crat.c:1742:11: warning: unused variable ‘entries’ [-Wunused-variable]
> > uint32_t entries = 0;
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>
> > Signed-off-by: David Gow <davidgow@...gle.com>
> > ---
> > drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdkfd/kfd_crat.c | 6 +++---
> > drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdkfd/kfd_topology.c | 2 +-
> > 2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdkfd/kfd_crat.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdkfd/kfd_crat.c
> > index 9624bbe8b501..b1e2d117be3d 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdkfd/kfd_crat.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdkfd/kfd_crat.c
> > @@ -1682,7 +1682,7 @@ static int kfd_fill_mem_info_for_cpu(int numa_node_id, int *avail_size,
> > return 0;
> > }
> >
> > -#ifdef CONFIG_X86_64
> > +#if defined(CONFIG_X86_64) && !defined(CONFIG_UML)
>
> I don't think it makes sense to compile a hardware device driver in a
> UML config. Instead of scattering UML #ifdefs through our code, I would
> recommend adding this to Kconfig:
>
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/Kconfig
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/Kconfig
> @@ -254,7 +254,7 @@ source "drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/Kconfig"
>
> config DRM_AMDGPU
> tristate "AMD GPU"
> - depends on DRM && PCI && MMU
> + depends on DRM && PCI && MMU && !UML
> select FW_LOADER
> select DRM_KMS_HELPER
> select DRM_SCHED
>
> That would address patch 2 of this series as well.
I agree. Otherwise, we are always going to be chasing these issues.
Alex
>
> Regards,
> Felix
>
>
> > static int kfd_fill_iolink_info_for_cpu(int numa_node_id, int *avail_size,
> > uint32_t *num_entries,
> > struct crat_subtype_iolink *sub_type_hdr)
> > @@ -1741,7 +1741,7 @@ static int kfd_create_vcrat_image_cpu(void *pcrat_image, size_t *size)
> > struct crat_subtype_generic *sub_type_hdr;
> > int avail_size = *size;
> > int numa_node_id;
> > -#ifdef CONFIG_X86_64
> > +#if defined(CONFIG_X86_64) && !defined(CONFIG_UML)
> > uint32_t entries = 0;
> > #endif
> > int ret = 0;
> > @@ -1806,7 +1806,7 @@ static int kfd_create_vcrat_image_cpu(void *pcrat_image, size_t *size)
> > sub_type_hdr->length);
> >
> > /* Fill in Subtype: IO Link */
> > -#ifdef CONFIG_X86_64
> > +#if defined(CONFIG_X86_64) && !defined(CONFIG_UML)
> > ret = kfd_fill_iolink_info_for_cpu(numa_node_id, &avail_size,
> > &entries,
> > (struct crat_subtype_iolink *)sub_type_hdr);
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdkfd/kfd_topology.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdkfd/kfd_topology.c
> > index 948fbb39336e..b38fc530ffe2 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdkfd/kfd_topology.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdkfd/kfd_topology.c
> > @@ -1552,7 +1552,7 @@ static int kfd_cpumask_to_apic_id(const struct cpumask *cpumask)
> > first_cpu_of_numa_node = cpumask_first(cpumask);
> > if (first_cpu_of_numa_node >= nr_cpu_ids)
> > return -1;
> > -#ifdef CONFIG_X86_64
> > +#if defined(CONFIG_X86_64) && !defined(CONFIG_UML)
> > return cpu_data(first_cpu_of_numa_node).apicid;
> > #else
> > return first_cpu_of_numa_node;
Powered by blists - more mailing lists