On 26.03.2010, at 11:40, Bruce Majia wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 10:10:19AM +0100, Alexander Graf wrote:
>>
>> On 26.03.2010, at 08:15, Bruce Majia wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, Jan 17, 2010 at 03:06:11PM +0200, Avi Kivity wrote:
>>>> On 01/10/2010 07:01 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
>>>>> While trying to compile an E500 vmlinux, I stumbled across a compilation bug
>>>>> that was obviously there before I touched any of the code. A trace point
>>>>> doesn't get the correct arguments.
>>>>>
>>>>> Since that shouldn't be any critical to the functionality of the code, my quick
>>>>> workaround is to #if 0 it out. I would very much appreciate someone fixing it
>>>>> properly though.
>>>>>
>>>>> Liu, it would be nice if you could be the one doing that.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Applied, thanks.
>>>
>>> Hi Avi,
>>>
>>> Seems the problem still exists in the mainline kernel. Are you guys miss
>>> something in the past few months? Does it means even if I passed compile
>>> phase with the '#if 0' workaround, it's functions are not completed yet.
>>> So its impossible to try kvm on ppc e500 target?
>>
>> If #if 0 only affects you if you want to trace that specific function. It's probably safe to say you don't care, so just #if 0 it out and be good :-).
>>
>> Alex
>
> I'd like to say I am okay with #if 0 stuff. :) But fail to have the
> source code compiled is bad. Based on latest linus tree, I have to
> apply following stuff to make KVM + mpc85xx_defconfig pass build phase:
>
> ---
> arch/powerpc/kvm/booke.c | 2 +-
> arch/powerpc/kvm/e500_tlb.c | 2 ++
> arch/powerpc/kvm/powerpc.c | 2 +-
> 3 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kvm/booke.c b/arch/powerpc/kvm/booke.c
> index 4d686cc..0cde83b 100644
> --- a/arch/powerpc/kvm/booke.c
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/kvm/booke.c
> @@ -137,7 +137,7 @@ static int kvmppc_booke_irqprio_deliver(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
> unsigned int priority)
> {
> int allowed = 0;
> - ulong msr_mask;
> + ulong msr_mask = 0;
This is a real bug.
> bool update_esr = false, update_dear = false;
>
> switch (priority) {
> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kvm/e500_tlb.c b/arch/powerpc/kvm/e500_tlb.c
> index 0d772e6..c52e8c2 100644
> --- a/arch/powerpc/kvm/e500_tlb.c
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/kvm/e500_tlb.c
> @@ -225,8 +225,10 @@ static void kvmppc_e500_stlbe_invalidate(struct kvmppc_vcpu_e500 *vcpu_e500,
>
> kvmppc_e500_shadow_release(vcpu_e500, tlbsel, esel);
> stlbe->mas1 = 0;
> +#if 0
> trace_kvm_stlb_inval(index_of(tlbsel, esel), stlbe->mas1, stlbe->mas2,
> stlbe->mas3, stlbe->mas7);
> +#endif
Avi, please make sure e43f2f741a49483034bf968841275cfa553a4cb3 gets into 2.6.34.
> }
>
> static void kvmppc_e500_tlb1_invalidate(struct kvmppc_vcpu_e500 *vcpu_e500,
> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kvm/powerpc.c b/arch/powerpc/kvm/powerpc.c
> index 51aedd7..372b678 100644
> --- a/arch/powerpc/kvm/powerpc.c
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/kvm/powerpc.c
> @@ -277,7 +277,7 @@ static void kvmppc_complete_dcr_load(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
> static void kvmppc_complete_mmio_load(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
> struct kvm_run *run)
> {
> - ulong gpr;
> + ulong gpr = 0;
This is a bug, but should never hit anyone. Either way having warnings is bad.
Bruce, please put the two not initialized variables in a patch, put a proper Signed-off-by with patch description in and submit it to kvm-ppc@vger and kvm@vger. I'll ack it then, but would like to keep the credits to you :)
Alex--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
