Found the problem. The NetBSD slaves are running a 32-bit kernel and userspace.
```
nbslave7a# uname -p
i386
```
Because of this CAA_BITS_PER_LONG is set to 32 and the case for size 8
isn't compiled in uatomic_add_return. Even though the underlying
(virtual) hardware has 64-bit support, and supports the required
8-byte wide instrcution, it cannot be used because we are running on a
32-bit kernel with a 32-bit userspace.
Manu, was there any particular reason why you 32-bit NetBSD? If there
are none, can you please replace the VMs with 64-bit NetBSD. Until
then you can keep mgmt_v3-locks.t disabled.
~kaushal
On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 4:56 PM, Kaushal M <kshlmster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I seem to have found the issue.
>
> The uatomic_add_return function is defined in urcu/uatomic.h as
> ```
> /* uatomic_add_return */
>
> static inline __attribute__((always_inline))
> unsigned long __uatomic_add_return(void *addr, unsigned long val,
> int len)
> {
> switch (len) {
> case 1:
> {
> unsigned char result = val;
>
> __asm__ __volatile__(
> "lock; xaddb %1, %0"
> : "+m"(*__hp(addr)), "+q" (result)
> :
> : "memory");
> return result + (unsigned char)val;
> }
> case 2:
> {
> unsigned short result = val;
>
> __asm__ __volatile__(
> "lock; xaddw %1, %0"
> : "+m"(*__hp(addr)), "+r" (result)
> :
> : "memory");
> return result + (unsigned short)val;
> }
> case 4:
> {
> unsigned int result = val;
>
> __asm__ __volatile__(
> "lock; xaddl %1, %0"
> : "+m"(*__hp(addr)), "+r" (result)
> :
> : "memory");
> return result + (unsigned int)val;
> }
> #if (CAA_BITS_PER_LONG == 64)
> case 8:
> {
> unsigned long result = val;
>
> __asm__ __volatile__(
> "lock; xaddq %1, %0"
> : "+m"(*__hp(addr)), "+r" (result)
> :
> : "memory");
> return result + (unsigned long)val;
> }
> #endif
> }
> /*
> * generate an illegal instruction. Cannot catch this with
> * linker tricks when optimizations are disabled.
> */
> __asm__ __volatile__("ud2");
> return 0;
> }
> ```
>
> As we can see, uatomic_add_return uses different assembly instructions
> to perform the add based on the size of the datatype of the value. If
> the size of the value doesn't exactly match one of the sizes in the
> switch case, it deliberately generates a SIGILL.
>
> The case for size 8, is conditionally compiled as we can see above.
> From the backtrace Atin provided earlier, we see that the size of the
> value is indeed 8 (we use uint64_t). Because we had a SIGILL, we can
> conclude that the case for size 8 wasn't compiled.
>
> I don't know why this compilation didn't (or as this is in a header
> file, doesn't) happen on the NetBSD slaves and this is something I'd
> like to find out.
>
> ~kaushal
>
> On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 1:50 PM, Anand Nekkunti <anekkunt@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> On 04/28/2015 01:40 PM, Emmanuel Dreyfus wrote:
>>>
>>> On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 01:37:42PM +0530, Anand Nekkunti wrote:
>>>>
>>>> __asm__ is for to write assembly code in c (gcc),
>>>> __volatile__(:::)
>>>> compiler level barrier to force the compiler not to do reorder the
>>>> instructions(to avoid optimization ) .
>>>
>>> Sure, but the gory details should be of no interest to the developer
>>> engaged in debug: if it crashes this is probably because it is called
>>> with wrong arguments, hence the question:
>>> ccing gluster-devel
>>>>>
>>>>> new_peer->generation = uatomic_add_return (&conf->generation,
>>>>> 1);
>>>>> Are new_peer->generation and conf->generation sane?
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Gluster-devel mailing list
>> Gluster-devel@xxxxxxxxxxx
>> http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
_______________________________________________
Gluster-devel mailing list
Gluster-devel@xxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
