Re: Testers needed for LTTng 0.6.0pre8

Hi,

0.6.0pre9 fixes the powerpc optimization. There is a weird difference between
x86 and powerpc for the asm operands.

x86 is weird, not powerpc. :)

Mathieu

* Mathieu Desnoyers ([email protected]) wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I made the generic markers asm independant and disabled the powerpc optimisation
> for now. The powerpc gcc has problems with the "m" operands.
> 
> Please try the 0.6.0pre8.
> 
> Mathieu
> 
> * Christopher Yeoh ([email protected]) wrote:
> > At 2006/9/27 15:54-0400  Mathieu Desnoyers writes:
> > > 
> > > I would like you to test it on various architectures (and check for warnings) to
> > > see if I broke something when porting the LTTng instrumentation to markers.
> > 
> > The marker mechanism doesn't compile on ppc64. Neither the asm-powerpc
> > or asm-generic version of marker.h work.
> > 
> > The problem appears to be in the macro:
> > 
> > 		asm volatile(	".section .markers, \"a\";\n\t" \
> > 					".long %1, 0f, %2, %3;\n\t" \
> > 					".previous;\n\t" \
> > 					".align 32;\n\t" \
> > 					"0:\n\t" \
> > 					"li $0,%0;\n\t" \
> > 				: "=r" (condition) : \
> > 				"m" (*(#name)), \
> > 				"m" (__mark_call_##name), \
> > 				"m" (*format)); \
> > 
> > For the .long part, gcc ends up outputting something like:
> > 
> > long 0(9), 0f, 0(11), 0(3);
> > 
> > ie register relative addresses which the assembler barfs on.
> > 
> > Would something like the following be ok? (based on asm-generic version
> > - I did try to do get something working based on the asm-powerpc
> > version working, but so far without success):
> > 
> > #define MARK(name, format, args...) \
> >         do { \
> >                 static marker_probe_func *__mark_call_##name = \
> >                                         __mark_empty_function; \
> >                 volatile static char __marker_enable_##name = 0; \
> >                 static struct _mark_marker_local { \
> >                         const char *local_name; \
> >                         volatile char *enable; \
> >                         marker_probe_func **call; \
> >                         const char *local_format; \
> >                 } __attribute__((packed)) i __attribute__ ((section(".markers"))) \
> > 		 __attribute__((__used__))  = \
> >                     { #name, &__marker_enable_##name, &__mark_call_##name, format }; \
> >                 if (unlikely(__marker_enable_##name)) { \
> >                         preempt_disable(); \
> >                         (*__mark_call_##name)(format, ## args); \
> >                         preempt_enable_no_resched(); \
> >                 } \
> >         } while(0)
> > 
> > 
> > There also seems to be a problem with fs/compat.c (~1514) with lttng_name
> > not being declared.
> > 
> > Chris
> > -- 
> > [email protected]
> > IBM OzLabs Linux Development Group, ADL
> > Canberra, Australia
> > 
> OpenPGP public key:              http://krystal.dyndns.org:8080/key/compudj.gpg
> Key fingerprint:     8CD5 52C3 8E3C 4140 715F  BA06 3F25 A8FE 3BAE 9A68 
> _______________________________________________
> ltt-dev mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://www.listserv.shafik.org/listserv/listinfo/ltt-dev
> 
OpenPGP public key:              http://krystal.dyndns.org:8080/key/compudj.gpg
Key fingerprint:     8CD5 52C3 8E3C 4140 715F  BA06 3F25 A8FE 3BAE 9A68