Re: proxy_pda was Re: What was in the x86 merge for .20

2007-01-15 Thread Paweł Sikora
Hi, I've reviewed the thread and can propose a solution. Let's see e.g. the dev.s ( from fuse.ko ). Currently with gcc-4.2 we get: fuse_req_init_context: movl$_proxy_pda+8, %edx #, tmp62 #APP movl %gs:8,%ecx #, ret__ #NO_APP movl344(%ecx), %ecx # .fsuid, .fsuid

Re: What was in the x86 merge for .20

2006-12-09 Thread Andi Kleen
[sorry for the delay. My DSL line at home was AWOL] On Saturday 09 December 2006 09:41, Andrew Morton wrote: > > void __init quirk_intel_irqbalance(void) > > Yes, that boots. Andi: you want me to send it to Mr T? I'm about to send it. -Andi - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "un

Re: What was in the x86 merge for .20

2006-12-09 Thread Andrew Morton
On Fri, 8 Dec 2006 10:00:04 -0800 "Siddha, Suresh B" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Fri, Dec 08, 2006 at 06:10:29PM +0100, Andi Kleen wrote: > > Yes please check the mainline git tree. > > Ok. I think I am the culprit :( > > Andi, Attached patch should fix the panic issue that Andrew encountere

Re: proxy_pda was Re: What was in the x86 merge for .20

2006-12-08 Thread Arkadiusz Miskiewicz
On Friday 08 December 2006 22:22, Andi Kleen wrote: > The trouble is when it's CSEd it actually causes worse code because > a register is tied up. That might not be worth the advantage of having it? > > Hmm, maybe marking it volatile would help? Arkadiusz, does the following > patch help? Unfortu

Re: proxy_pda was Re: What was in the x86 merge for .20

2006-12-08 Thread Jeremy Fitzhardinge
Andi Kleen wrote: > The trouble is when it's CSEd it actually causes worse code because > a register is tied up. That might not be worth the advantage of having it? > I think so, definitely; without proxy_pda you need to make it asm volatile+mem clobber, which completely eliminates all optimisa

Re: proxy_pda was Re: What was in the x86 merge for .20

2006-12-08 Thread Andi Kleen
On Friday 08 December 2006 22:09, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote: > Andi Kleen wrote: > > Looking at Arkadiusz' output file it looks like gcc 4.2 decided to CSE the > > address :/ > > > > movl$_proxy_pda+8, %edx #, tmp65 > > > > Very sad, but legitimate. > > > > Yes, that was my conclusi

Re: proxy_pda was Re: What was in the x86 merge for .20

2006-12-08 Thread Jeremy Fitzhardinge
Andi Kleen wrote: > Looking at Arkadiusz' output file it looks like gcc 4.2 decided to CSE the > address :/ > > movl$_proxy_pda+8, %edx #, tmp65 > > Very sad, but legitimate. > Yes, that was my conclusion too. Though in this case the code could be cleaned up by cutting down on th

proxy_pda was Re: What was in the x86 merge for .20

2006-12-08 Thread Andi Kleen
On Friday 08 December 2006 21:35, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote: > Arkadiusz Miskiewicz wrote: > > LD .tmp_vmlinux1 > > arch/i386/kernel/built-in.o: In function `math_emulate': > > (.text+0x3809): undefined reference to `_proxy_pda' > > > > Hm, in theory nothing should ever generate a refere

Re: What was in the x86 merge for .20

2006-12-08 Thread Jeremy Fitzhardinge
Andi Kleen wrote: >> binutils-2.17.50.0.8-1.i686 >> gcc-4.2.0-0.20061206r119598.2.i686 >> > > Hmm, that's not even a release -- afaik gcc 4.2 isn't out yet. > > Can you please do > > make arch/i386/math-emu/fpu_entry.i > make arch/i386/math-emu/fpu_entry.s > > and send me the resulting .i and

Re: What was in the x86 merge for .20

2006-12-08 Thread Jeremy Fitzhardinge
Arkadiusz Miskiewicz wrote: > LD .tmp_vmlinux1 > arch/i386/kernel/built-in.o: In function `math_emulate': > (.text+0x3809): undefined reference to `_proxy_pda' > Hm, in theory nothing should ever generate a reference to _proxy_pda. What compiler are you using? J - To unsubscribe fr

Re: [discuss] Re: What was in the x86 merge for .20

2006-12-08 Thread Andi Kleen
On Friday 08 December 2006 19:00, Siddha, Suresh B wrote: > On Fri, Dec 08, 2006 at 06:10:29PM +0100, Andi Kleen wrote: > > Yes please check the mainline git tree. > > Ok. I think I am the culprit :( > > Andi, Attached patch should fix the panic issue that Andrew encountered. > Andrew, please con

Re: What was in the x86 merge for .20

2006-12-08 Thread Andi Kleen
> binutils-2.17.50.0.8-1.i686 > gcc-4.2.0-0.20061206r119598.2.i686 Hmm, that's not even a release -- afaik gcc 4.2 isn't out yet. Can you please do make arch/i386/math-emu/fpu_entry.i make arch/i386/math-emu/fpu_entry.s and send me the resulting .i and .s files privately? -Andi - To unsubscr

Re: What was in the x86 merge for .20

2006-12-08 Thread Siddha, Suresh B
On Fri, Dec 08, 2006 at 06:10:29PM +0100, Andi Kleen wrote: > Yes please check the mainline git tree. Ok. I think I am the culprit :( Andi, Attached patch should fix the panic issue that Andrew encountered. Andrew, please confirm. Andi, if you are applying Ingo's genapic changes and reverting th

Re: What was in the x86 merge for .20

2006-12-08 Thread Arkadiusz Miskiewicz
On Friday 08 December 2006 19:04, Andi Kleen wrote: > > > > Something related (git tree fetched 1-2h ago) ? > > > > > > Probably. Please send your .config. > > > > # > > # Automatically generated make config: don't edit > > # Linux kernel version: 2.6.19 > > # Fri Dec 8 11:40:15 2006 > > # > > CON

Re: What was in the x86 merge for .20

2006-12-08 Thread Andi Kleen
> > > > > > Something related (git tree fetched 1-2h ago) ? > > > > Probably. Please send your .config. > > # > # Automatically generated make config: don't edit > # Linux kernel version: 2.6.19 > # Fri Dec 8 11:40:15 2006 > # > CONFIG_X86_32=y I built your config and it builds fine here with g

Re: What was in the x86 merge for .20

2006-12-08 Thread Andi Kleen
> My old 4-way Intel Nocona-based SDV panics during boot with "APIC mode must > be flat on this system" and I don't know how to make it stop. Help. Hmm, i had these patches for week and didn't change anything. Weird. > > It didn't do this with your tree in 2.6.19-rc6-mm1 or 2.6.19-rc6-mm2, both

Re: What was in the x86 merge for .20

2006-12-08 Thread Andi Kleen
On Friday 08 December 2006 17:41, Siddha, Suresh B wrote: > On Fri, Dec 08, 2006 at 02:08:04AM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > > On Fri, 8 Dec 2006 04:01:25 +0100 > > Andi Kleen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > [The merge already made it to Linus' tree. Sorry for sending this message > > > late]

Re: What was in the x86 merge for .20

2006-12-08 Thread Siddha, Suresh B
On Fri, Dec 08, 2006 at 02:08:04AM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Fri, 8 Dec 2006 04:01:25 +0100 > Andi Kleen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > [The merge already made it to Linus' tree. Sorry for sending this message > > late] > > > > Most of this is for both i386 and x86-64, unless when noted

Re: What was in the x86 merge for .20

2006-12-08 Thread Muli Ben-Yehuda
On Fri, Dec 08, 2006 at 02:03:12PM +0100, Arkadiusz Miskiewicz wrote: > On Friday 08 December 2006 13:51, Muli Ben-Yehuda wrote: > > On Fri, Dec 08, 2006 at 01:04:23PM +0100, Arkadiusz Miskiewicz wrote: > > > On Friday 08 December 2006 04:01, Andi Kleen wrote: > > > > - Support for a Processor Data

Re: What was in the x86 merge for .20

2006-12-08 Thread Muli Ben-Yehuda
On Fri, Dec 08, 2006 at 01:04:23PM +0100, Arkadiusz Miskiewicz wrote: > On Friday 08 December 2006 04:01, Andi Kleen wrote: > > > - Support for a Processor Data Area (PDA) on i386. This makes > > the code more similar to x86-64 and will allow some other > > optimizations in the future. > > LD

Re: What was in the x86 merge for .20

2006-12-08 Thread Arkadiusz Miskiewicz
On Friday 08 December 2006 04:01, Andi Kleen wrote: > - Support for a Processor Data Area (PDA) on i386. This makes > the code more similar to x86-64 and will allow some other > optimizations in the future. LD .tmp_vmlinux1 arch/i386/kernel/built-in.o: In function `math_emulate': (.text+0x

Re: What was in the x86 merge for .20

2006-12-08 Thread Ingo Molnar
* Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > My old 4-way Intel Nocona-based SDV panics during boot with "APIC mode > must be flat on this system" and I don't know how to make it stop. > Help. > > It didn't do this with your tree in 2.6.19-rc6-mm1 or 2.6.19-rc6-mm2, > both of which included

Re: What was in the x86 merge for .20

2006-12-08 Thread Andrew Morton
On Fri, 8 Dec 2006 04:01:25 +0100 Andi Kleen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > [The merge already made it to Linus' tree. Sorry for sending this message > late] > > Most of this is for both i386 and x86-64, unless when noted > > These are just some high lights. As usual there are more > smaller optim

What was in the x86 merge for .20

2006-12-07 Thread Andi Kleen
[The merge already made it to Linus' tree. Sorry for sending this message late] Most of this is for both i386 and x86-64, unless when noted These are just some high lights. As usual there are more smaller optimizations, cleanups etc - paravirt support for i386: the basic hooks for replacing all