9:08 p.m.
Hi Christophe and Michael,
On Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 10:24:08PM +0800, Christophe Leroy wrote:
Le 05/01/2021 ? 11:58, kernel test robot a 閏rit :
> tree: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git master
> head: e71ba9452f0b5b2e8dc8aa5445198cd9214a6a62
> commit: 8b8319b181fd9d6821703fef1228b4dcde613a16 powerpc/44x: Don't support 440
when CONFIG_PPC_47x is set
I see no link with that commit. Looks like the problem has been existing for some time.
It exists on the commit before that one, it exists on v5.9 and it exists on v5.10 with
that commit
reverted.
Yes, this seems to be a long-standing issue, and we just double checked
this compile error.
It happend when compiling arch/powerpc/platforms/44x/fsp2.c, macro
'mfdcr' requirs an instant number as parameter, while is not met by
show_plbopb_regs(). Changing show_plbopb_regs() from function to
a macro fixes the error, as the patch below:
Thanks,
Feng
From 3bcb9638afc873d0e803aea1aad4f77bf1c2f6f6 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Feng Tang <feng.tang(a)intel.com>
Date: Fri, 5 Feb 2021 16:08:43 +0800
Subject: [PATCH] powerpc/44x/fsp2: fix a compiling error regarding macro
'mdfcr'
0day's kbuild test found error:
"
CC arch/powerpc/platforms/44x/fsp2.o
{standard input}:577: Error: unsupported relocation against base
{standard input}:580: Error: unsupported relocation against base
{standard input}:583: Error: unsupported relocation against base
"
The reason is macro 'mfdcr' requirs an instant number as parameter,
which is not met by show_plbopb_regs().
Fix it by converting show_plbopb_regs() from function to macro.
Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp(a)intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Feng Tang <feng.tang(a)intel.com>
---
arch/powerpc/platforms/44x/fsp2.c | 18 +++++++++---------
1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/powerpc/platforms/44x/fsp2.c b/arch/powerpc/platforms/44x/fsp2.c
index b299e43..4732669 100644
--- a/arch/powerpc/platforms/44x/fsp2.c
+++ b/arch/powerpc/platforms/44x/fsp2.c
@@ -66,15 +66,15 @@ static void l2regs(void)
pr_err("LOG5: 0x%08x\n", mfl2(L2LOG5));
}
-static void show_plbopb_regs(u32 base, int num)
-{
- pr_err("\nPLBOPB Bridge %d:\n", num);
- pr_err("GESR0: 0x%08x\n", mfdcr(base + PLB4OPB_GESR0));
- pr_err("GESR1: 0x%08x\n", mfdcr(base + PLB4OPB_GESR1));
- pr_err("GESR2: 0x%08x\n", mfdcr(base + PLB4OPB_GESR2));
- pr_err("GEARU: 0x%08x\n", mfdcr(base + PLB4OPB_GEARU));
- pr_err("GEAR: 0x%08x\n", mfdcr(base + PLB4OPB_GEAR));
-}
+#define show_plbopb_regs(base, num) \
+ { \
+ pr_err("\nPLBOPB Bridge %d:\n", num); \
+ pr_err("GESR0: 0x%08x\n", mfdcr(base + PLB4OPB_GESR0)); \
+ pr_err("GESR1: 0x%08x\n", mfdcr(base + PLB4OPB_GESR1)); \
+ pr_err("GESR2: 0x%08x\n", mfdcr(base + PLB4OPB_GESR2)); \
+ pr_err("GEARU: 0x%08x\n", mfdcr(base + PLB4OPB_GEARU)); \
+ pr_err("GEAR: 0x%08x\n", mfdcr(base + PLB4OPB_GEAR)); \
+ }
static irqreturn_t bus_err_handler(int irq, void *data)
{
--
2.7.4
> > date: 5 weeks ago
> > config: powerpc-randconfig-p002-20210105 (attached as .config)
> > compiler: powerpc-linux-gcc (GCC) 9.3.0
> > reproduce (this is a W=1 build):
> > wget
https://raw.githubusercontent.com/intel/lkp-tests/master/sbin/make.cross -O
~/bin/make.cross
> > chmod +x ~/bin/make.cross
> > #
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit...
> > git remote add linus
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git
> > git fetch --no-tags linus master
> > git checkout 8b8319b181fd9d6821703fef1228b4dcde613a16
> > # save the attached .config to linux build tree
> > COMPILER_INSTALL_PATH=$HOME/0day COMPILER=gcc-9.3.0 make.cross
ARCH=powerpc
> >
> > If you fix the issue, kindly add following tag as appropriate
> > Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp(a)intel.com>
> >
> > All errors (new ones prefixed by >>):
> >
> > {standard input}: Assembler messages:
> >>> {standard input}:577: Error: unsupported relocation against base
> > {standard input}:580: Error: unsupported relocation against base
> > {standard input}:583: Error: unsupported relocation against base
> > {standard input}:586: Error: unsupported relocation against base
> > {standard input}:589: Error: unsupported relocation against base
> > {standard input}:592: Error: unsupported relocation against base
> > {standard input}:595: Error: unsupported relocation against base
> > {standard input}:598: Error: unsupported relocation against base
> > {standard input}:601: Error: unsupported relocation against base
> > {standard input}:604: Error: unsupported relocation against base
> > {standard input}:607: Error: unsupported relocation against base
> > {standard input}:610: Error: unsupported relocation against base
> > {standard input}:613: Error: unsupported relocation against base
> > {standard input}:616: Error: unsupported relocation against base
> > {standard input}:619: Error: unsupported relocation against base
> > {standard input}:622: Error: unsupported relocation against base
> > {standard input}:625: Error: unsupported relocation against base
> > {standard input}:628: Error: unsupported relocation against base
> > {standard input}:631: Error: unsupported relocation against base
> > {standard input}:634: Error: unsupported relocation against base
> >
> > ---
> > 0-DAY CI Kernel Test Service, Intel Corporation
> > https://lists.01.org/hyperkitty/list/kbuild-all@lists.01.org
> >
>
8:36 p.m.
New subject: {standard input}:577: Error: unsupported relocation against base
Feng Tang <feng.tang(a)intel.com> writes:
Hi Christophe and Michael,
On Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 10:24:08PM +0800, Christophe Leroy wrote:
>
> Le 05/01/2021 ? 11:58, kernel test robot a 閏rit :
> > tree: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git
master
> > head: e71ba9452f0b5b2e8dc8aa5445198cd9214a6a62
> > commit: 8b8319b181fd9d6821703fef1228b4dcde613a16 powerpc/44x: Don't support
440 when CONFIG_PPC_47x is set
>
> I see no link with that commit. Looks like the problem has been existing for some
time.
> It exists on the commit before that one, it exists on v5.9 and it exists on v5.10
with that commit
> reverted.
Yes, this seems to be a long-standing issue, and we just double checked
this compile error.
It happend when compiling arch/powerpc/platforms/44x/fsp2.c, macro
'mfdcr' requirs an instant number as parameter, while is not met by
show_plbopb_regs(). Changing show_plbopb_regs() from function to
a macro fixes the error, as the patch below:
Thanks,
Feng
From 3bcb9638afc873d0e803aea1aad4f77bf1c2f6f6 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Feng Tang <feng.tang(a)intel.com>
Date: Fri, 5 Feb 2021 16:08:43 +0800
Subject: [PATCH] powerpc/44x/fsp2: fix a compiling error regarding macro
'mdfcr'
0day's kbuild test found error:
"
CC arch/powerpc/platforms/44x/fsp2.o
{standard input}:577: Error: unsupported relocation against base
{standard input}:580: Error: unsupported relocation against base
{standard input}:583: Error: unsupported relocation against base
"
The reason is macro 'mfdcr' requirs an instant number as parameter,
which is not met by show_plbopb_regs().
It doesn't require a constant, it checks if the argument is constant:
#define mfdcr(rn) \
({unsigned int rval; \
if (__builtin_constant_p(rn) && rn < 1024) \
asm volatile("mfdcr %0," __stringify(rn) \
: "=r" (rval)); \
else if (likely(cpu_has_feature(CPU_FTR_INDEXED_DCR))) \
rval = mfdcrx(rn); \
else \
rval = __mfdcr(rn); \
rval;})
But the error you're seeing implies the compiler is choosing the first
leg of the if, even when rn == "base + x", which is surprising.
We've had cases in the past of __builtin_constant_p() returning false
for things that a human can see are constant at build time, but I've
never seen the reverse.
cheers
9:49 p.m.
New subject: {standard input}:577: Error: unsupported relocation against base
Hi Michael,
On Tue, Feb 16, 2021 at 08:36:02PM +1100, Michael Ellerman wrote:
Feng Tang <feng.tang(a)intel.com> writes:
> Hi Christophe and Michael,
>
> On Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 10:24:08PM +0800, Christophe Leroy wrote:
>>
>> Le 05/01/2021 ? 11:58, kernel test robot a 閏rit :
>> > tree: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git
master
>> > head: e71ba9452f0b5b2e8dc8aa5445198cd9214a6a62
>> > commit: 8b8319b181fd9d6821703fef1228b4dcde613a16 powerpc/44x: Don't
support 440 when CONFIG_PPC_47x is set
>>
>> I see no link with that commit. Looks like the problem has been existing for
some time.
>> It exists on the commit before that one, it exists on v5.9 and it exists on
v5.10 with that commit
>> reverted.
>
> Yes, this seems to be a long-standing issue, and we just double checked
> this compile error.
>
> It happend when compiling arch/powerpc/platforms/44x/fsp2.c, macro
> 'mfdcr' requirs an instant number as parameter, while is not met by
> show_plbopb_regs(). Changing show_plbopb_regs() from function to
> a macro fixes the error, as the patch below:
>
> Thanks,
> Feng
>
>
> From 3bcb9638afc873d0e803aea1aad4f77bf1c2f6f6 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Feng Tang <feng.tang(a)intel.com>
> Date: Fri, 5 Feb 2021 16:08:43 +0800
> Subject: [PATCH] powerpc/44x/fsp2: fix a compiling error regarding macro
> 'mdfcr'
>
> 0day's kbuild test found error:
>
> "
> CC arch/powerpc/platforms/44x/fsp2.o
>
> {standard input}:577: Error: unsupported relocation against base
> {standard input}:580: Error: unsupported relocation against base
> {standard input}:583: Error: unsupported relocation against base
> "
>
> The reason is macro 'mfdcr' requirs an instant number as parameter,
> which is not met by show_plbopb_regs().
It doesn't require a constant, it checks if the argument is constant:
Aha, seems my grep found the wrong target: arch/powerpc/boot/dcr.h,
which has
#define mfdcr(rn) \
({ \
unsigned long rval; \
asm volatile("mfdcr %0,%1" : "=r"(rval) : "i"(rn)); \
rval; \
})
#define mfdcr(rn) \
({unsigned int rval; \
if (__builtin_constant_p(rn) && rn < 1024) \
asm volatile("mfdcr %0," __stringify(rn) \
: "=r" (rval)); \
else if (likely(cpu_has_feature(CPU_FTR_INDEXED_DCR))) \
rval = mfdcrx(rn); \
else \
rval = __mfdcr(rn); \
rval;})
But the error you're seeing implies the compiler is choosing the first
leg of the if, even when rn == "base + x", which is surprising.
Yes, it might be related to compiler (though myself isn't faimiliar
with it). As show_plbopb_regs() was introduced by commit 7813043e1bbc
("powerpc/44x/fsp2: Add irq error handlers") back in 2017, while it
was just reported.
We've had cases in the past of __builtin_constant_p() returning
false
for things that a human can see are constant at build time, but I've
never seen the reverse.
cheers
Thanks,
Feng
10:08 p.m.
New subject: {standard input}:577: Error: unsupported relocation against base
Feng Tang <feng.tang(a)intel.com> writes:
Hi Michael,
On Tue, Feb 16, 2021 at 08:36:02PM +1100, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> Feng Tang <feng.tang(a)intel.com> writes:
> > Hi Christophe and Michael,
> >
> > On Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 10:24:08PM +0800, Christophe Leroy wrote:
> >>
> >> Le 05/01/2021 ? 11:58, kernel test robot a 閏rit :
> >> > tree:
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git master
> >> > head: e71ba9452f0b5b2e8dc8aa5445198cd9214a6a62
> >> > commit: 8b8319b181fd9d6821703fef1228b4dcde613a16 powerpc/44x: Don't
support 440 when CONFIG_PPC_47x is set
> >>
> >> I see no link with that commit. Looks like the problem has been existing for
some time.
> >> It exists on the commit before that one, it exists on v5.9 and it exists on
v5.10 with that commit
> >> reverted.
> >
> > Yes, this seems to be a long-standing issue, and we just double checked
> > this compile error.
> >
> > It happend when compiling arch/powerpc/platforms/44x/fsp2.c, macro
> > 'mfdcr' requirs an instant number as parameter, while is not met by
> > show_plbopb_regs(). Changing show_plbopb_regs() from function to
> > a macro fixes the error, as the patch below:
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Feng
> >
> >
> > From 3bcb9638afc873d0e803aea1aad4f77bf1c2f6f6 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> > From: Feng Tang <feng.tang(a)intel.com>
> > Date: Fri, 5 Feb 2021 16:08:43 +0800
> > Subject: [PATCH] powerpc/44x/fsp2: fix a compiling error regarding macro
> > 'mdfcr'
> >
> > 0day's kbuild test found error:
> >
> > "
> > CC arch/powerpc/platforms/44x/fsp2.o
> >
> > {standard input}:577: Error: unsupported relocation against base
> > {standard input}:580: Error: unsupported relocation against base
> > {standard input}:583: Error: unsupported relocation against base
> > "
> >
> > The reason is macro 'mfdcr' requirs an instant number as parameter,
> > which is not met by show_plbopb_regs().
>
> It doesn't require a constant, it checks if the argument is constant:
Aha, seems my grep found the wrong target: arch/powerpc/boot/dcr.h,
which has
#define mfdcr(rn) \
({ \
unsigned long rval; \
asm volatile("mfdcr %0,%1" : "=r"(rval) : "i"(rn)); \
rval; \
})
Yeah, annoyingly we have several macros like that duplicated in
arch/powerpc/boot.
> #define mfdcr(rn) \
> ({unsigned int rval; \
> if (__builtin_constant_p(rn) && rn < 1024) \
> asm volatile("mfdcr %0," __stringify(rn) \
> : "=r" (rval)); \
> else if (likely(cpu_has_feature(CPU_FTR_INDEXED_DCR))) \
> rval = mfdcrx(rn); \
> else \
> rval = __mfdcr(rn); \
> rval;})
>
> But the error you're seeing implies the compiler is choosing the first
> leg of the if, even when rn == "base + x", which is surprising.
Yes, it might be related to compiler (though myself isn't faimiliar
with it). As show_plbopb_regs() was introduced by commit 7813043e1bbc
("powerpc/44x/fsp2: Add irq error handlers") back in 2017, while it
was just reported.
It seems to be something in the config, I can only reproduce with the
config attached to the original report. I can't see any reason why the
config matters for this bug, but perhaps it's enabling something that's
confusing the compiler somehow.
Anyway I'll post a patch to change the asm so the bug goes away.
cheers
579
days inactive
592
days old
3 comments
2 participants
participants (2)
-
Feng Tang -
Michael Ellerman