lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2020]   [May]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [rcu:dev.2020.05.26a 56/72] refperf.c:undefined reference to `__umoddi3'
From
Date
On 5/28/20 8:31 AM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> Hi Paul,
>
> On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 3:51 PM Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@kernel.org> wrote:
>> On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 09:04:38AM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>>> On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 5:26 AM kbuild test robot <lkp@intel.com> wrote:
>>>> tree: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/paulmck/linux-rcu.git dev.2020.05.26a
>>>> head: 63fdce1252f16032c9e1eb7244bb674ba4f84855
>>>> commit: bd5b16d6c88da451a46d068a25fafad8e83d14a6 [56/72] refperf: Allow decimal nanoseconds
>>>> config: m68k-allyesconfig (attached as .config)
>>>> compiler: m68k-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
>>>> git checkout bd5b16d6c88da451a46d068a25fafad8e83d14a6
>>>> # save the attached .config to linux build tree
>>>> COMPILER_INSTALL_PATH=$HOME/0day COMPILER=gcc-9.3.0 make.cross ARCH=m68k
>>>>
>>>> If you fix the issue, kindly add following tag as appropriate
>>>> Reported-by: kbuild test robot <lkp@intel.com>
>>>>
>>>> All errors (new ones prefixed by >>, old ones prefixed by <<):
>>>>
>>>> m68k-linux-ld: kernel/rcu/refperf.o: in function `main_func':
>>>>>> refperf.c:(.text+0x762): undefined reference to `__umoddi3'
>>>>>> m68k-linux-ld: refperf.c:(.text+0x8f2): undefined reference to `__udivdi3'
>>>> m68k-linux-ld: refperf.c:(.text+0x97c): undefined reference to `__udivdi3'
>>>
>>> | --- a/kernel/rcu/refperf.c
>>> | +++ b/kernel/rcu/refperf.c
>>> | @@ -375,7 +375,7 @@ static int main_func(void *arg)
>>> | if (torture_must_stop())
>>> | goto end;
>>> |
>>> | - reader_tasks[exp].result_avg =
>>> process_durations(exp) / ((exp + 1) * loops);
>>> | + reader_tasks[exp].result_avg = 1000 *
>>> process_durations(exp) / ((exp + 1) * loops);
>>>
>>> div64_ul() for 64-by-unsigned-long division
>>
>> Ah, thank you for the explanation!
>>
>> This is just a performance-test module intended for SMP systems, so
>> I don't see much point in making it work on m68k, which looks to be
>> UP-only. But it is clearly useful to prevent the test bots from building
>> refperf on m68k. So one approach would be for me to make its Kconfig
>> option depend on SMP. Another would be to make it depend on 64BIT.
>> Still another would be to make it depend on !M68K.
>>
>> I could potentially dump out the numbers in picoseconds, then
>> do the averaging and other division operations in userspace,
>> but that is strange enough to cause more trouble than it is worth.
>> (An rcu_read_lock()/rcu_read_unlock() pair takes -how- long???) Though if
>> there was some point in running this on m68k, it might be worth it (with
>> "PICOSECONDS" in all caps or some such), but in this case it is not.
>> But this would probably require more data to be dumped to allow userspace
>> to do the operations, increasing the probability of lost printk()s. :-/
>>
>> Left to myself, I would take the easy way out and make this depend
>> on 64BIT.
>>
>> But you must have run into this situation before. Any thoughts?
>
> Oh, this is not just on m68k. I expect the build bots to start complaining
> about other 32-bit platforms, too, like i386 and arm32 ;-)

Yes, I was just about to report it for/on i386.


> While restricting this to 64BIT will fix the issue, are you sure people
> on 32-bit SMP platforms don't want to run this code?
>
> So I'd go for div64_ul() and do_div().
>
>>> | }
>>> |
>>> | // Print the average of all experiments
>>> | @@ -386,7 +386,7 @@ static int main_func(void *arg)
>>> | strcat(buf, "Threads\tTime(ns)\n");
>>> |
>>> | for (exp = 0; exp < nreaders; exp++) {
>>> | - sprintf(buf1, "%d\t%llu\n", exp + 1,
>>> reader_tasks[exp].result_avg);
>>> | + sprintf(buf1, "%d\t%llu.%03d\n", exp + 1,
>>> reader_tasks[exp].result_avg / 1000,
>>> (int)(reader_tasks[exp].result_avg % 1000));
>>>
>>> do_div() for 64-by-32 division/modulo
>
> Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
>
> Geert
>

thanks.
--
~Randy

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2020-05-28 17:34    [W:0.103 / U:2.684 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site