On 11/29/10 12:21, Mathias Krause wrote: > On 29.11.2010, 21:11 Randy Dunlap wrote: >> On 11/29/10 12:02, Mathias Krause wrote: >>> On 29.11.2010, 20:54 Randy Dunlap wrote: >>>> On 11/29/10 11:45, Mathias Krause wrote: >>>>> On 29.11.2010, 20:31 Randy Dunlap wrote: >>>>>> On 11/29/10 11:21, Mathias Krause wrote: >>>>>>> On 29.11.2010, 19:54 Randy Dunlap wrote: >>>>>>>> On 11/29/10 10:26, Mathias Krause wrote: >>>>>>>>> On 29.11.2010, 17:31 Randy Dunlap wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 29 Nov 2010 14:03:35 +1100 Stephen Rothwell wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Hi all, >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Changes since 20101126: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> on i386 builds, I get tons of these (and more) errors: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> arch/x86/crypto/aesni-intel_asm.S:841: Error: bad register name `%r12' >>>>>>>>>> arch/x86/crypto/aesni-intel_asm.S:842: Error: bad register name `%r13' >>>>>>>>>> arch/x86/crypto/aesni-intel_asm.S:843: Error: bad register name `%r14' >>>>>>>>>> arch/x86/crypto/aesni-intel_asm.S:844: Error: bad register name `%rsp' >>>>>>>>>> arch/x86/crypto/aesni-intel_asm.S:849: Error: bad register name `%rsp' >>>>>>>>>> arch/x86/crypto/aesni-intel_asm.S:850: Error: bad register name `%rsp' >>>>>>>>>> arch/x86/crypto/aesni-intel_asm.S:851: Error: bad register name `%r9' >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> even though the kernel .config file says: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> CONFIG_CRYPTO_AES=m >>>>>>>>>> CONFIG_CRYPTO_AES_586=m >>>>>>>>>> CONFIG_CRYPTO_AES_NI_INTEL=m >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Should arch/x86/crypto/aesni-intel_asm.S be testing >>>>>>>>>> #ifdef CONFIG_X86_64 >>>>>>>>>> instead of >>>>>>>>>> #ifdef __x86_64__ >>>>>>>>>> or does that not matter? >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> or is this a toolchain issue? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Well, __x86_64__ should be a build-in define of the compiler while >>>>>>>>> CONFIG_X86_64 is defined for 64 bit builds in include/generated/autoconf.h. >>>>>>>>> So by using the latter we should be on the safe side but if your compiler >>>>>>>>> defines __x86_64__ for 32-bit builds it's simply broken. Also git grep >>>>>>>>> showed quite a few more places using __x86_64__ so those would miscompile on >>>>>>>>> your toolchain, too. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> But it looks like linux-next is just missing >>>>>>>>> 559ad0ff1368baea14dbc3207d55b02bd69bda4b from Herbert's git repo at >>>>>>>>> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/herbert/cryptodev-2.6.git. >>>>>>>>> That should fix the build issue. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The build problem still happens when that patch is applied. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> That's weird. So it must be something with your toolchain. >>>>>>> Can you please post the output of the following commands?: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> $ touch /tmp/null.c; cc -m32 -dD -E /tmp/null.c | grep -E 'x86|i.86' >>>>>> >>>>>> #define __i386 1 >>>>>> #define __i386__ 1 >>>>>> #define i386 1 >>>>>> #define __i586 1 >>>>>> #define __i586__ 1 >>>>>> >>>>>>> $ touch /tmp/null.c; cc -m64 -dD -E /tmp/null.c | grep -E 'x86|i.86' >>>>>> >>>>>> #define __x86_64 1 >>>>>> #define __x86_64__ 1 >>>>>> >>>>>> So that's not the problem... and the patch below didn't help. >>>>> >>>>> That's odd. The output of the commands looks good so the x86-64 specific code >>>>> should be left out for 32-bit builds. :/ >>>>> >>>>>> Sorry that I even asked about that. What next? >>>>> >>>>> Can you please post the full error message. Meanwhile I'm checking out a >>>>> linux-next tree, trying to reproduce your problem. >>>>> >>>> >>>> I just built with "make V=1" to see the full commands that are used, but >>>> that didn't help me either: >>>> >>>> gcc -Wp,-MD,arch/x86/crypto/.aesni-intel_asm.o.d -nostdinc -isystem /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-redhat-linux/4.4.1/include -I/lnx/src/NEXT/linux-next-20101129/arch/x86/include -Iinclude -I/lnx/src/NEXT/linux-next-20101129/include -include include/generated/autoconf.h -D__KERNEL__ -D__ASSEMBLY__ -m32 -DCONFIG_AS_CFI=1 -DCONFIG_AS_CFI_SIGNAL_FRAME=1 -DMODULE -c -o arch/x86/crypto/aesni-intel_asm.o /lnx/src/NEXT/linux-next-20101129/arch/x86/crypto/aesni-intel_asm.S >>>> >>>> >>>> There are 2945 lines like this: >>>> >>>> linux-next-20101129/arch/x86/crypto/aesni-intel_asm.S:841: Error: bad register name `%r12' >>> >>> Well, in my tree (linux-next + 559ad0ff) line 841 is a comment. Albeit without >>> 559ad0ff it's a 'push %r12'. So maybe you should apply the patch just once >>> more to be sure. ;) >> >> Touche. >> What does that patch have to do with aesni-intel?? > > The description should be clear enough: "crypto: aesni-intel - Fixed build error > on x86-32". > Here is the link to the patch: <http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/herbert/cryptodev-2.6.git;a=patch;h=559ad0ff1368baea14dbc3207d55b02bd69bda4b>. Please apply it on > top of your linux-next build. > >> I'm using the linux-next tarball of 20111129. >> However, your s/__x86_64__/CONFIG_X86_64/ patch was applied, so I dropped it. > > Well I doubt it. The patch was made on top of 559ad0ff so it should have failed > to apply in your tree since obviously 559ad0ff is missing. > >> new output file: >> http://oss.oracle.com/~rdunlap/doc/cry4.out > > Same bug: 559ad0ff is still missing. Please apply the patch from the link above. Thanks for persisting/continuing with me. I apologize, I had applied the most recent patch in Herbert's cryptodev repo, not the one that you referred me to. Yes, the build is now fixed. -- ~Randy *** Remember to use Documentation/SubmitChecklist when testing your code *** -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-next" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
