Hello Daisuke, Just pinging you to see if you have you come any closer to updating the gcore extension module? Thanks, Dave ----- Original Message ----- > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > Hi Dave, > > > > which glibc version are you using? for us, it seems > > /usr/include/sys/procfs.h > > is not included, we still met build error with your patch > > The ARM64 machine I'm building on is based upon glibc-headers-2.17-55.11, > But /usr/include/sys/procfs.h has been part of glibc-headers since at > least glibc-headers-2.3.2-95. So if I understand you correctly, does > the /usr/include/sys/uncontext.h *not* include <sys/procfs.h> on your > system? > > > > > so Lei and me made some patches to use the old way for ARM64, and also add > > compat mode support for ARM64 > > That certainly makes the patch much uglier. Would it be possible to > explicitly > #include <sys/procfs.h> encapsulated by #ifdef ARM64 in the relevant places? > > > > > these patches are verified on both ARM64 compat mode and ARM64, please help > > review, thanks > > Look, we're getting ahead of things. Let's defer to Daisuke to decide how he > is > going to approach this first. > > Dave > > > > > Best Regards, > > Wei > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: crash-utility-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx > > [mailto:crash-utility-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Dave Anderson > > Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2014 8:31 PM > > To: HATAYAMA Daisuke > > Cc: crash-utility@xxxxxxxxxx > > Subject: Re: [PATCH] crash-gcore-command extension module: > > ARM64 support > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: Dave Anderson <anderson@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > Subject: [PATCH] crash-gcore-command extension module: ARM64 support > > > Date: Thu, 17 Jul 2014 12:04:45 -0400 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hello Daisuke, > > > > > > > > > > Hello Dave, > > > > > > Sorry for very late responce.... > > > > > > > Attached is a patch to introduce support for the ARM64 architecture > > > > for the gcore extension module. > > > > > > > > The patch is fairly straight-forward other than the fact that on > > > > ARM64 machines, the chain of headers included from the crash > > > > utility's "defs.h" looks like this: > > > > > > > > /usr/include/crash/defs.h > > > > /usr/include/signal.h > > > > /usr/include/sys/ucontext.h > > > > /usr/include/sys/procfs.h > > > > > > > > The <sys/procfs.h> file defines several of the ELF-related > > > > structures that are hard-coded in gcore_defs.h, causing compile > > > > failures due to duplicate structure declarations. > > > > > > > > Note that the <sys/ucontext.h> file on the other three architectures > > > > does not #include <sys/procfs.h> so there are no conflicts. It > > > > would be possible to move all architectures to include > > > > <sys/procfs.h>, but for example, that would also bring in the > > > > <sys/user.h> definition of the user_regs_struct, which in turn > > > > causes a myriad of register name mismatches in gcore_x86.c. > > > > So for the sake of simplicity, wherever there is an ARM64-only > > > > duplicate structure or definition in gcore_defs.h, I've encapsulated > > > > them > > > > by: > > > > > > > > #if defined(X86) || defined(X86_64) || defined(ARM) > > > > > > > > > > Thanks for this explanation. I'll also try to investigate this. > > > > > > > Also, there are two generic fixes, one where the gcore module fails > > > > on Linux 3.11 and later kernels due to a structure member name > > > > change, and another that changes the getopt() return variable to an > > > > "int" instead of a "char". > > > > > > > > Here are the details: > > > > > > > > gcore.mk: > > > > > > > > - Introduce ARM64 as a supported architecture > > > > - Add libgcore/gcore_arm64 to GCORE_CFILES > > > > > > > > gcore.c: > > > > > > > > - In cmd_gcore() change "c" type to "int" to correctly match > > > > the return type of getopt(); without it, the while loop > > > > spins indefinitely on ARM64. > > > > > > > - In gcore_offset_table_init(), account for the Linux 3.11 > > > > structure member name-change from ns_proxy.pid_ns to > > > > ns_proxy.pid_ns_for_children; without it, the gcore command > > > > fails during initialization. > > > > > > I've already dealt with this locally, but thanks. > > > > > > > > > > > libgcore/gcore_defs.h: > > > > > > > > - Add ARM64 ELF- and REGSET_VIEW-related #defines required for > > > > each architecture. > > > > - Account for variable page sizes in ARM64. > > > > - Restrict the hard-coded ELF_NGREG, elf_siginfo, elf_prstatus, > > > > __kernel_old_uid_t and __kernel_old_gid_t, and elf_prsinfo > > > > definitions to X86, X86_64 and ARM architectures. > > > > - Add ARM64 thread_struct_fpsmid_state and thread_struct_tp_value > > > > offsets to gcore_offset_table. > > > > > > > > libgcore/gcore_coredump.c: > > > > > > > > - In fill_prstatus_note(), account for the ARM64 usage of > > > > "user_pt_regs" structure instead of the "user_regs_struct" > > > > used by the other architectures. > > > > > > > > libgcore/gcore_arm64.c: > > > > > > > > - Implement ARM64-specific user_regset and user_regset_view > > > > structures and all required support functions. > > > > > > > > Please accept these changes into an new package version. > > > > > > > > > > I'll commit these into my local repository with some changes for ease > > > of my maintainance purpose. Maybe, I'll ask you to review the changed > > > version. > > > > Excellent -- thanks! I thought I'd lost you! > > > > Dave > > > > -- > > Crash-utility mailing list > > Crash-utility@xxxxxxxxxx > > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/crash-utility > > > > -- > > Crash-utility mailing list > > Crash-utility@xxxxxxxxxx > > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/crash-utility > -- Crash-utility mailing list Crash-utility@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/crash-utility
