On 2015/1/7 16:39, Jiri Olsa wrote: > On Wed, Jan 07, 2015 at 02:40:04PM +0900, Namhyung Kim wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On Wed, Jan 07, 2015 at 10:53:52AM +0800, Wang Nan wrote: >>> Ping... >> >> Sorry for long delay. >> >>> >>> On 2014/12/29 16:14, Wang Nan wrote: >>>> On 2014/12/29 15:56, Namhyung Kim wrote: >>>>> Hi Wang, >>>>> >>>>> (Adding Arnaldo and Jiri to CC) >>>>> >>>>> On Sat, Dec 27, 2014 at 09:26:11AM +0800, Wang Nan wrote: >>>>>> When build with 'make ARCH=x86' and dwarf unwind is on, there is a >>>>>> compiling error: >>>>>> >>>>>> CC /home/wn/perf/arch/x86/util/unwind-libdw.o >>>>>> CC /home/wn/perf/arch/x86/tests/regs_load.o >>>>>> arch/x86/tests/regs_load.S: Assembler messages: >>>>>> arch/x86/tests/regs_load.S:65: Error: operand type mismatch for `push' >>>>>> arch/x86/tests/regs_load.S:72: Error: operand type mismatch for `pop' >>>>>> make[1]: *** [/home/wn/perf/arch/x86/tests/regs_load.o] Error 1 >>>>>> make[1]: INTERNAL: Exiting with 25 jobserver tokens available; should >>>>>> be 24! >>>>>> make: *** [all] Error 2 >>>>>> ... >>>>>> >>>>>> Which is caused by incorrectly undefine macro HAVE_ARCH_X86_64_SUPPORT. >>>>>> 'config/Makefile.arch' tests __x86_64__ only when 'ARCH=x86_64'. However, >>>>>> with 'ARCH=x86', the underlying compile may also be x86_64, which causes >>>>>> mismatching. >>>>> >>>>> Hmm.. how did you compile this? I guess ARCH=x86 requires -m32 flag >>>>> to the gcc, did you pass it (like via EXTRA_CFLAGS=-m32)? >>>>> >>>>> I'm confused by 'underlying compile may also be x86_64' part.. >>>>> >>>> >>>> I hit this problem when building perf with Yocto >>>> (https://www.yoctoproject.org/), which >>>> is a famous building system for embeded system. >>>> >>>> When building kernel, we can simply use 'make ARCH=x86' and select >>>> 'CONFIG_64BIT' >>>> in menuconfig to get a x86_64 kernel. As a result, there building framework >>>> like Yocto doesn't ever consider 'x86_64' as a valid ARCH option. See: >>>> https://git.yoctoproject.org/cgit/cgit.cgi/poky/tree/meta/classes/kernel-arch.bbclass >>>> Therefore, when building with such framework, it uses a x86_64 compiler >>>> and ARCH=x86. >> >> Hmm.. okay. I think that it should also be checked with the new build >> system for perf, Jiri? ;) > > yea.. however the config/Makefile still stays as it was > > but whatever change you'll make for Makefile.perf I need > to transform.. but this one does not seem too massive ;-) > >> >> Anyway, I cleaned up the code like below.. As __LP64__ is defined for >> x86_64 as well, we can consolidate the __x86_64__ check to the >> __LP64__ check and get rid of the IS_X86_64 IMHO. >> >> Thanks, >> Namhyung >> >> >> diff --git a/tools/perf/Makefile.perf b/tools/perf/Makefile.perf >> index 67a03a825b3c..eb3e2f3e14b4 100644 >> --- a/tools/perf/Makefile.perf >> +++ b/tools/perf/Makefile.perf >> @@ -462,10 +462,12 @@ BUILTIN_OBJS += $(OUTPUT)builtin-bench.o >> # Benchmark modules >> BUILTIN_OBJS += $(OUTPUT)bench/sched-messaging.o >> BUILTIN_OBJS += $(OUTPUT)bench/sched-pipe.o >> +ifeq ($(ARCH),x86) >> ifeq ($(RAW_ARCH),x86_64) >> BUILTIN_OBJS += $(OUTPUT)bench/mem-memcpy-x86-64-asm.o >> BUILTIN_OBJS += $(OUTPUT)bench/mem-memset-x86-64-asm.o >> endif >> +endif > > isn't the check for x86 superfluous here? the x86_64 check is stronger > > otherwise it looks ok to me.. Wang Nan, could you please check > if it fixes the issue for you? >
Sorry, although Namhyung Kim's patch solves my ARCH=x86 problem, it breaks ARM building: ... | bench/../../../arch/x86/lib/memcpy_64.S: Assembler messages: | bench/../../../arch/x86/lib/memcpy_64.S:27: Error: junk at end of line, first unrecognized character is `,' | bench/../../../arch/x86/lib/memcpy_64.S:29: Error: bad instruction `movq %rdi,%rax' | bench/../../../arch/x86/lib/memcpy_64.S:30: Error: bad instruction `movq %rdx,%rcx' | bench/../../../arch/x86/lib/memcpy_64.S:31: Error: bad instruction `shrq $3,%rcx' | bench/../../../arch/x86/lib/memcpy_64.S:32: Error: bad instruction `andl $7,%edx' ... It builds x86_64 bench when I corss compiling perf for arm (use ARCH=arm). This is caused by Makefile.perf: ... BUILTIN_OBJS += $(OUTPUT)bench/sched-pipe.o ifeq ($(RAW_ARCH),x86_64) BUILTIN_OBJS += $(OUTPUT)bench/mem-memcpy-x86-64-asm.o BUILTIN_OBJS += $(OUTPUT)bench/mem-memset-x86-64-asm.o endif BUILTIN_OBJS += $(OUTPUT)bench/mem-memcpy.o ... Which rely on RAW_ARCH, but RAW_ARCH is not a cross-compiling-friendly variable now. > thanks, > jirka > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
