Re: linux-next: Tree for November 29 (aesni-intel)

[Mathias Krause]

On 29.11.2010, 21:11 Randy Dunlap wrote:
> On 11/29/10 12:02, Mathias Krause wrote:
>> On 29.11.2010, 20:54 Randy Dunlap wrote:
>>> On 11/29/10 11:45, Mathias Krause wrote:
>>>> On 29.11.2010, 20:31 Randy Dunlap wrote:
>>>>> On 11/29/10 11:21, Mathias Krause wrote:
>>>>>> On 29.11.2010, 19:54 Randy Dunlap wrote:
>>>>>>> On 11/29/10 10:26, Mathias Krause wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 29.11.2010, 17:31 Randy Dunlap wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 29 Nov 2010 14:03:35 +1100 Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Changes since 20101126:
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> on i386 builds, I get tons of these (and more) errors:
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> arch/x86/crypto/aesni-intel_asm.S:841: Error: bad register name `%r12'
>>>>>>>>> arch/x86/crypto/aesni-intel_asm.S:842: Error: bad register name `%r13'
>>>>>>>>> arch/x86/crypto/aesni-intel_asm.S:843: Error: bad register name `%r14'
>>>>>>>>> arch/x86/crypto/aesni-intel_asm.S:844: Error: bad register name `%rsp'
>>>>>>>>> arch/x86/crypto/aesni-intel_asm.S:849: Error: bad register name `%rsp'
>>>>>>>>> arch/x86/crypto/aesni-intel_asm.S:850: Error: bad register name `%rsp'
>>>>>>>>> arch/x86/crypto/aesni-intel_asm.S:851: Error: bad register name `%r9'
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> even though the kernel .config file says:
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> CONFIG_CRYPTO_AES=m
>>>>>>>>> CONFIG_CRYPTO_AES_586=m
>>>>>>>>> CONFIG_CRYPTO_AES_NI_INTEL=m
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Should arch/x86/crypto/aesni-intel_asm.S be testing
>>>>>>>>> #ifdef CONFIG_X86_64
>>>>>>>>> instead of
>>>>>>>>> #ifdef __x86_64__
>>>>>>>>> or does that not matter?
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> or is this a toolchain issue?
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Well, __x86_64__ should be a build-in define of the compiler while
>>>>>>>> CONFIG_X86_64 is defined for 64 bit builds in include/generated/autoconf.h.
>>>>>>>> So by using the latter we should be on the safe side but if your compiler
>>>>>>>> defines __x86_64__ for 32-bit builds it's simply broken. Also git grep
>>>>>>>> showed quite a few more places using __x86_64__ so those would miscompile on
>>>>>>>> your toolchain, too.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> But it looks like linux-next is just missing
>>>>>>>> 559ad0ff1368baea14dbc3207d55b02bd69bda4b from Herbert's git repo at
>>>>>>>> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/herbert/cryptodev-2.6.git.
>>>>>>>> That should fix the build issue.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> The build problem still happens when that patch is applied.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> That's weird. So it must be something with your toolchain.
>>>>>> Can you please post the output of the following commands?:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> $ touch /tmp/null.c; cc -m32 -dD -E /tmp/null.c | grep -E 'x86|i.86'
>>>>> 
>>>>> #define __i386 1
>>>>> #define __i386__ 1
>>>>> #define i386 1
>>>>> #define __i586 1
>>>>> #define __i586__ 1
>>>>> 
>>>>>> $ touch /tmp/null.c; cc -m64 -dD -E /tmp/null.c | grep -E 'x86|i.86'
>>>>> 
>>>>> #define __x86_64 1
>>>>> #define __x86_64__ 1
>>>>> 
>>>>> So that's not the problem... and the patch below didn't help.
>>>> 
>>>> That's odd. The output of the commands looks good so the x86-64 specific code
>>>> should be left out for 32-bit builds. :/
>>>> 
>>>>> Sorry that I even asked about that.  What next?
>>>> 
>>>> Can you please post the full error message. Meanwhile I'm checking out a
>>>> linux-next tree, trying to reproduce your problem.
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> I just built with "make V=1" to see the full commands that are used, but
>>> that didn't help me either:
>>> 
>>> gcc -Wp,-MD,arch/x86/crypto/.aesni-intel_asm.o.d  -nostdinc -isystem /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-redhat-linux/4.4.1/include -I/lnx/src/NEXT/linux-next-20101129/arch/x86/include -Iinclude  -I/lnx/src/NEXT/linux-next-20101129/include -include include/generated/autoconf.h -D__KERNEL__ -D__ASSEMBLY__ -m32 -DCONFIG_AS_CFI=1 -DCONFIG_AS_CFI_SIGNAL_FRAME=1 -DMODULE  -c -o arch/x86/crypto/aesni-intel_asm.o /lnx/src/NEXT/linux-next-20101129/arch/x86/crypto/aesni-intel_asm.S
>>> 
>>> 
>>> There are 2945 lines like this:
>>> 
>>> linux-next-20101129/arch/x86/crypto/aesni-intel_asm.S:841: Error: bad register name `%r12'
>> 
>> Well, in my tree (linux-next + 559ad0ff) line 841 is a comment. Albeit without
>> 559ad0ff it's a 'push %r12'. So maybe you should apply the patch just once
>> more to be sure. ;)
> 
> Touche.
> What does that patch have to do with aesni-intel??

The description should be clear enough: "crypto: aesni-intel - Fixed build error
on x86-32".
Here is the link to the patch: <http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/herbert/cryptodev-2.6.git;a=patch;h=559ad0ff1368baea14dbc3207d55b02bd69bda4b>. Please apply it on
top of your linux-next build.

> I'm using the linux-next tarball of 20111129.
> However, your s/__x86_64__/CONFIG_X86_64/ patch was applied, so I dropped it.

Well I doubt it. The patch was made on top of 559ad0ff so it should have failed
to apply in your tree since obviously 559ad0ff is missing.

> new output file:
> http://oss.oracle.com/~rdunlap/doc/cry4.out

Same bug: 559ad0ff is still missing. Please apply the patch from the link above.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/