Re: [kvm-unit-tests PATCH] arm64: Compile with -mno-outline-atomics for GCC >= 10

[Alexandru Elisei <alexandru.elisei@arm.com>]

Hi Drew,

On 7/27/20 1:30 PM, Andrew Jones wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 27, 2020 at 01:21:03PM +0100, Alexandru Elisei wrote:
>> Hi Drew,
>>
>> On 7/18/20 2:50 PM, Alexandru Elisei wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> On 7/18/20 10:11 AM, Andrew Jones wrote:
>>>> On Fri, Jul 17, 2020 at 05:47:27PM +0100, Alexandru Elisei wrote:
>>>>> GCC 10.1.0 introduced the -m{,no-}outline-atomics flags which, according to
>>>>> man 1 gcc:
>>>>>
>>>>> "Enable or disable calls to out-of-line helpers to implement atomic
>>>>> operations.  These helpers will, at runtime, determine if the LSE
>>>>> instructions from ARMv8.1-A can be used; if not, they will use the
>>>>> load/store-exclusive instructions that are present in the base ARMv8.0 ISA.
>>>>> [..] This option is on by default."
>>>>>
>>>>> Unfortunately the option causes the following error at compile time:
>>>>>
>>>>> aarch64-linux-gnu-ld -nostdlib -pie -n -o arm/spinlock-test.elf -T /path/to/kvm-unit-tests/arm/flat.lds \
>>>>> 	arm/spinlock-test.o arm/cstart64.o lib/libcflat.a lib/libfdt/libfdt.a /usr/lib/gcc/aarch64-linux-gnu/10.1.0/libgcc.a lib/arm/libeabi.a arm/spinlock-test.aux.o
>>>>> aarch64-linux-gnu-ld: /usr/lib/gcc/aarch64-linux-gnu/10.1.0/libgcc.a(lse-init.o): in function `init_have_lse_atomics':
>>>>> lse-init.c:(.text.startup+0xc): undefined reference to `__getauxval'
>>>>>
>>>>> This is happening because we are linking against our own libcflat which
>>>>> doesn't implement the function __getauxval().
>>>>>
>>>>> Disable the use of the out-of-line functions by compiling with
>>>>> -mno-outline-atomics if we detect a GCC version greater than 10.
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Alexandru Elisei <alexandru.elisei@arm.com>
>>>>> ---
>>>>>
>>>>> Tested with gcc versions 10.1.0 and 5.4.0 (cross-compilation), 9.3.0
>>>>> (native).
>>>>>
>>>>> I've been able to suss out the reason for the build failure from this
>>>>> rejected gcc patch [1].
>>>>>
>>>>> [1] https://patches.openembedded.org/patch/172460/
>>>>>
>>>>>  arm/Makefile.arm64 | 6 ++++++
>>>>>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/arm/Makefile.arm64 b/arm/Makefile.arm64
>>>>> index dfd0c56fe8fb..3223cb966789 100644
>>>>> --- a/arm/Makefile.arm64
>>>>> +++ b/arm/Makefile.arm64
>>>>> @@ -9,6 +9,12 @@ ldarch = elf64-littleaarch64
>>>>>  arch_LDFLAGS = -pie -n
>>>>>  CFLAGS += -mstrict-align
>>>>>  
>>>>> +# The -mno-outline-atomics flag is only valid for GCC versions 10 and greater.
>>>>> +GCC_MAJOR_VERSION=$(shell $(CC) -dumpversion 2> /dev/null | cut -f1 -d.)
>>>>> +ifeq ($(shell expr "$(GCC_MAJOR_VERSION)" ">=" "10"), 1)
>>>>> +CFLAGS += -mno-outline-atomics
>>>>> +endif
>>>> How about this patch instead?
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/Makefile b/Makefile
>>>> index 3ff2f91600f6..0e21a49096ba 100644
>>>> --- a/Makefile
>>>> +++ b/Makefile
>>>> @@ -17,6 +17,11 @@ DESTDIR := $(PREFIX)/share/kvm-unit-tests/
>>>>  
>>>>  .PHONY: arch_clean clean distclean cscope
>>>>  
>>>> +# cc-option
>>>> +# Usage: OP_CFLAGS+=$(call cc-option, -falign-functions=0, -malign-functions=0)
>>>> +cc-option = $(shell if $(CC) -Werror $(1) -S -o /dev/null -xc /dev/null \
>>>> +              > /dev/null 2>&1; then echo "$(1)"; else echo "$(2)"; fi ;)
>>>> +
>>>>  #make sure env CFLAGS variable is not used
>>>>  CFLAGS =
>>>>  
>>>> @@ -43,12 +48,6 @@ OBJDIRS += $(LIBFDT_objdir)
>>>>  #include architecture specific make rules
>>>>  include $(SRCDIR)/$(TEST_DIR)/Makefile
>>>>  
>>>> -# cc-option
>>>> -# Usage: OP_CFLAGS+=$(call cc-option, -falign-functions=0, -malign-functions=0)
>>>> -
>>>> -cc-option = $(shell if $(CC) -Werror $(1) -S -o /dev/null -xc /dev/null \
>>>> -              > /dev/null 2>&1; then echo "$(1)"; else echo "$(2)"; fi ;)
>>>> -
>>>>  COMMON_CFLAGS += -g $(autodepend-flags) -fno-strict-aliasing -fno-common
>>>>  COMMON_CFLAGS += -Wall -Wwrite-strings -Wempty-body -Wuninitialized
>>>>  COMMON_CFLAGS += -Wignored-qualifiers -Werror
>>>> diff --git a/arm/Makefile.arm64 b/arm/Makefile.arm64
>>>> index dfd0c56fe8fb..dbc7524d3070 100644
>>>> --- a/arm/Makefile.arm64
>>>> +++ b/arm/Makefile.arm64
>>>> @@ -9,6 +9,9 @@ ldarch = elf64-littleaarch64
>>>>  arch_LDFLAGS = -pie -n
>>>>  CFLAGS += -mstrict-align
>>>>  
>>>> +mno_outline_atomics := $(call cc-option, -mno-outline-atomics, "")
>>>> +CFLAGS += $(mno_outline_atomics)
>>>> +
>>>>  define arch_elf_check =
>>>>  	$(if $(shell ! $(OBJDUMP) -R $(1) >&/dev/null && echo "nok"),
>>>>  		$(error $(shell $(OBJDUMP) -R $(1) 2>&1)))
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> drew
>>> Looks much better than my version. Do you want me to spin a v2 or do you want to
>>> send it as a separate patch? If that's the case, I tested the same way I did my
>>> patch (gcc 10.1.0 and 5.4.0 for cross-compiling, 9.3.0 native):
>>>
>>> Tested-by: Alexandru Elisei <alexandru.elisei@arm.com>
>> Gentle ping regarding this.
>>
> Hi Alexandru,
>
> I was on vacation all last week and have been digging myself out of email
> today. I'll send this as a proper patch with your T-b later today or
> tomorrow.

Great, thanks, I was worried my reply might have slipped by unnoticed.

Thanks,
Alex
>
> Thanks,
> drew
>
_______________________________________________
kvmarm mailing list
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm