Thx for the clarification. I will try look at the changes. ljx, would
you take a look also?
Thx!
Sun
On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 6:40 PM, Ling Kun <erlv5...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi, Sun:
> Sorry for my confusing expression.
> This patch is only a private merged patch for Gang Yu's kernel building
> mail. And is only a draft version patch, which is not intended for SVN
> submit currently. It is not in Open64 trunck yet.
>
> Ling Kun
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 6:34 PM, Sun Chan <sun.c...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> when did this checkin happened? Did that gone through code review and
>> checkin review permission?
>> Sun
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 6:27 PM, Ling Kun <erlv5...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > Hi, Jian-Xin:
>> > Yes, it support.
>> >
>> > I am afraid the comment need to update. We only support last field
>> > variant-length firstly as the comment says, but after some regression
>> > test
>> > for kernel build and debugging, we finally add any field
>> > variant-length
>> > support.
>> >
>> > Ling Kun
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > 2012/1/3 Jian-Xin Lai <laij...@gmail.com>
>> >>
>> >> From the comments, this patch only supports the case of the last field
>> >> is variant-length? Does this patch work for the following case:
>> >> int foo(int x, int y) {
>> >> struct {
>> >> int arr1[x];
>> >> int arr2[0];
>> >> int arr3[y];
>> >> } st;
>> >> st.arr1[0] = st.arr2[0] = st.arr3[0] = 1;
>> >> printf("%d, %d, %d\n", st.arr1[0], st.arr2[0], st.arr3[0]);
>> >> }
>> >>
>> >> 2012/1/3 Ling Kun <erlv5...@gmail.com>:
>> >> > Hi, Gang and Sun:
>> >> > I have merged ICT's VLAS patch to open64, the code can work for
>> >> > a
>> >> > minimal testcase. Please see the attachment. More testcase following
>> >> > the
>> >> > standard is needed, and I am working on it.
>> >> >
>> >> > To make things done quickly, I modified some of the code, the
>> >> > patch
>> >> > in
>> >> > the attachment is only a draft version. I also need more information
>> >> > about
>> >> > the x86 kernel building environment to go on. And the patch itself
>> >> > need
>> >> > some
>> >> > modification to satisfy the svn trunck commit rules.
>> >> >
>> >> > My team mate Zhao Hongjian is working on the document. It will
>> >> > take
>> >> > him
>> >> > some times to finish.
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > Gang, would you please give me some details about your compile
>> >> > command
>> >> > and the .i file after preprocessor. Thanks.
>> >> >
>> >> > Ling Kun.
>> >> >
>> >> > The testcase :
>> >> > #include <assert.h>
>> >> > int f2(int i2){ return i2; }
>> >> > static void f1(int i1) {
>> >> > struct VLS{ int ary1[f2(i1)]; } st1;
>> >> > st1.ary1[1] = i1 + 1;
>> >> > assert( st1.ary1[1] == 3);
>> >> > }
>> >> >
>> >> > int main () {
>> >> > f1(2);
>> >> > return 0;
>> >> >
>> >> > }
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > On Sun, Jan 1, 2012 at 9:02 PM, Gang Yu <yugang...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Hi, Ling Kun:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Glad to hear loongson team has solved this issue! I googled this
>> >> >> feature on gnu site, I do not find the relevant documents. Could you
>> >> >> please
>> >> >> write some documents or elaborate more on your patch?
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Thanks a lot!
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Regards
>> >> >> Gang
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> 2012/1/1 凌坤 <erlv5...@gmail.com>
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> Hi, Sun:
>> >> >>> I am glad to do that. And now I am trying to merge this patch to
>> >> >>> Open64 svn trunck, it is a little complex to try to pick it from
>> >> >>> the
>> >> >>> Loongson branch :)
>> >> >>> Hoping that a patch that can pass some testcase can be submit in
>> >> >>> 1-2
>> >> >>> days :)
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> Happy New year.
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> Ling Kun
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> ------------------ Original ------------------
>> >> >>> From: "Sun Chan"<sun.c...@gmail.com>;
>> >> >>> Date: Sun, Jan 1, 2012 02:25 PM
>> >> >>> To: "Ling Kun"<lkun.e...@gmail.com>;
>> >> >>> Cc: "open64-devel"<open64-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>;
>> >> >>> Subject: Re: [Open64-devel] Current build status for linux kernel
>> >> >>> on
>> >> >>> open64
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> LingKun,
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> can you send the changes for VLS (or VLA) to this alias (or send to
>> >> >>> me
>> >> >>> and Yugang privately and we can help review and test out on x86)
>> >> >>> for
>> >> >>> review?
>> >> >>> Sun
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> On Sun, Jan 1, 2012 at 10:14 AM, Ling Kun <lkun.e...@gmail.com>
>> >> >>> wrote:
>> >> >>> > hi, Gang Yu:
>> >> >>> > Loongson compiler(based on Open64) team have successfully build
>> >> >>> > MIPS
>> >> >>> > Linux kernel 2.6.35, and make it run on Qemu. And we have solved
>> >> >>> > the
>> >> >>> > VLA
>> >> >>> > issue, the debug record and patches (based on the Open64 trunck
>> >> >>> > svn
>> >> >>> > r28xx)
>> >> >>> > of Loongson teams' work have be sent to Zhu qing.
>> >> >>> > If it is possible, we are glad to merge our VLA work to Open64
>> >> >>> > current
>> >> >>> > SVN trunck version.
>> >> >>> >
>> >> >>> > Ling Kun.
>> >> >>> >
>> >> >>> >
>> >> >>> >
>> >> >>> > On Sat, Dec 31, 2011 at 10:45 AM, Gang Yu <yugang...@gmail.com>
>> >> >>> > wrote:
>> >> >>> >>
>> >> >>> >> Thanks. we also wish could get input from the original wgen
>> >> >>> >> authors,
>> >> >>> >> it is
>> >> >>> >> leaving an unsupported feature for VLA and then compiler
>> >> >>> >> asserts.
>> >> >>> >> In
>> >> >>> >> order
>> >> >>> >> to avoid duplication of effort, we wish learn from the seniors
>> >> >>> >> and
>> >> >>> >> then we
>> >> >>> >> can go ahead or make workaround.
>> >> >>> >>
>> >> >>> >>
>> >> >>> >> Regards
>> >> >>> >> Gang
>> >> >>> >>
>> >> >>> >>
>> >> >>> >>
>> >> >>> >> On Sat, Dec 31, 2011 at 10:42 AM, Sun Chan <sun.c...@gmail.com>
>> >> >>> >> wrote:
>> >> >>> >>>
>> >> >>> >>> Let me try to understand. You are asking for opinions on
>> >> >>> >>> whether
>> >> >>> >>> ope64
>> >> >>> >>> should ignore the VLA problem until there is further
>> >> >>> >>> documentation
>> >> >>> >>> and/or evidence of more VLA usage? Until then, workaround that
>> >> >>> >>> by
>> >> >>> >>> changing kernel source?
>> >> >>> >>> Sun
>> >> >>> >>>
>> >> >>> >>> On Sat, Dec 31, 2011 at 10:36 AM, Gang Yu <yugang...@gmail.com>
>> >> >>> >>> wrote:
>> >> >>> >>> > Hi, list:
>> >> >>> >>> >
>> >> >>> >>> > We have some efforts on building and tuning linux kernel on
>> >> >>> >>> > open64,
>> >> >>> >>> > we
>> >> >>> >>> > have fixed several bugs and now we have only two building
>> >> >>> >>> > issues
>> >> >>> >>> > and
>> >> >>> >>> > several running issues at x86_64 target, O2 level.
>> >> >>> >>> >
>> >> >>> >>> > linux 2.6.32 as an example, the two building issues are:
>> >> >>> >>> >
>> >> >>> >>> > A). bug787, Rao Shivarama has submitted a patch, but due to
>> >> >>> >>> > the
>> >> >>> >>> > regression
>> >> >>> >>> > filed as bug882, the patch is backed out. This is still a
>> >> >>> >>> > pending
>> >> >>> >>> > issue. My
>> >> >>> >>> > personally investigation shows Rao's approach is on the right
>> >> >>> >>> > track,
>> >> >>> >>> > the
>> >> >>> >>> > bug882 shows the fix triggers the SSA version verification
>> >> >>> >>> > issues
>> >> >>> >>> > which
>> >> >>> >>> > are
>> >> >>> >>> > already known in open64, filed as bug889/891/892. We will
>> >> >>> >>> > continue
>> >> >>> >>> > work
>> >> >>> >>> > on
>> >> >>> >>> > it.
>> >> >>> >>> >
>> >> >>> >>> > B). the Variable Length Array in Structs (VLAS), this is a
>> >> >>> >>> > common
>> >> >>> >>> > issue
>> >> >>> >>> > for
>> >> >>> >>> > non-gnu compilers.
>> >> >>> >>> >
>> >> >>> >>> > clang documents the issue below:
>> >> >>> >>> >
>> >> >>> >>> > Intentionally unsupported GCC extensions
>> >> >>> >>> >
>> >> >>> >>> > clang does not support the gcc extension that allows
>> >> >>> >>> > variable-length
>> >> >>> >>> > arrays
>> >> >>> >>> > in structures. This is for a few reasons: one, it is tricky
>> >> >>> >>> > to
>> >> >>> >>> > implement,
>> >> >>> >>> > two, the extension is completely undocumented, and three, the
>> >> >>> >>> > extension
>> >> >>> >>> > appears to be rarely used. Note that clang does support
>> >> >>> >>> > flexible
>> >> >>> >>> > array
>> >> >>> >>> > members (arrays with a zero or unspecified size at the end of
>> >> >>> >>> > a
>> >> >>> >>> > structure).
>> >> >>> >>> >
>> >> >>> >>> >
>> >> >>> >>> > I review the failure case of kernel build, the VLAS are not
>> >> >>> >>> > the
>> >> >>> >>> > flexible
>> >> >>> >>> > array members(case like this : struct A { int a; int b; char
>> >> >>> >>> > ctx[]} is
>> >> >>> >>> > called Flexible array menbers. It is a newly introduced
>> >> >>> >>> > feature
>> >> >>> >>> > c99
>> >> >>> >>> > or
>> >> >>> >>> > later, open64 supports it well.)
>> >> >>> >>> >
>> >> >>> >>> > VLAS does not appear in linux kernel source code frequently:
>> >> >>> >>> >
>> >> >>> >>> > lib/libcrc32c.c
>> >> >>> >>> > u32 crc32c(u32 crc, const void *address, unsigned int length)
>> >> >>> >>> > 43{
>> >> >>> >>> > 44 struct {
>> >> >>> >>> > 45 struct shash_desc shash;
>> >> >>> >>> > 46 char ctx[crypto_shash_descsize(tfm)];
>> >> >>> >>> > 47 } desc;
>> >> >>> >>> > crypto/testmgr.c
>> >> >>> >>> > struct {
>> >> >>> >>> > 1432 struct shash_desc shash;
>> >> >>> >>> > 1433 char ctx[crypto_shash_descsize(tfm)];
>> >> >>> >>> > 1434 } sdesc;
>> >> >>> >>> > crypo/hmac.c
>> >> >>> >>> > struct {
>> >> >>> >>> > 1432 struct shash_desc shash;
>> >> >>> >>> > 1433 char ctx[crypto_shash_descsize(tfm)
>> >> >>> >>> > ];
>> >> >>> >>> > 1434 } sdesc;
>> >> >>> >>> >
>> >> >>> >>> >
>> >> >>> >>> > I just speculate that clang will support kernel build by
>> >> >>> >>> > flexible
>> >> >>> >>> > array
>> >> >>> >>> > members. It is not the case,
>> >> >>> >>> >
>> >> >>> >>> > http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=4071
>> >> >>> >>> >
>> >> >>> >>> > and people claim that they build up kernel with clang, but it
>> >> >>> >>> > is
>> >> >>> >>> > not
>> >> >>> >>> > fully
>> >> >>> >>> > functional.
>> >> >>> >>> >
>> >> >>> >>> >
>> >> >>> >>> >
>> >> >>> >>> > http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/cfe-dev/2010-October/011711.html
>> >> >>> >>> >
>> >> >>> >>> > as this guy pointed out,
>> >> >>> >>> >
>> >> >>> >>> > * SELinux, Posix ACLs, IPSec, eCrypt, anything that uses
>> >> >>> >>> > the
>> >> >>> >>> > crypto
>> >> >>> >>> > API -
>> >> >>> >>> > None
>> >> >>> >>> > of these will compile, due to either an ICE or
>> >> >>> >>> > variable-length
>> >> >>> >>> > arrays in
>> >> >>> >>> > structures (don't remember which, it's in my notes
>> >> >>> >>> > somewhere).
>> >> >>> >>> > If
>> >> >>> >>> > it's
>> >> >>> >>> > variable-length arrays or another intentionally unsupported
>> >> >>> >>> > GNUtension,
>> >> >>> >>> > I'm
>> >> >>> >>> > hoping it's just used in some isolated implementation
>> >> >>> >>> > detail
>> >> >>> >>> > (or
>> >> >>> >>> > details),
>> >> >>> >>> > and not a fundamental part of the crypto API (honestly just
>> >> >>> >>> > haven't
>> >> >>> >>> > had
>> >> >>> >>> > a
>> >> >>> >>> > chance to dive into the crypto source yet). I'm really
>> >> >>> >>> > hoping
>> >> >>> >>> > it's
>> >> >>> >>> > an
>> >> >>> >>> > issue
>> >> >>> >>> > in Clang, though, as it's easier for me to hack Clang and
>> >> >>> >>> > I'm
>> >> >>> >>> > trying to
>> >> >>> >>> > avoid kernel patches as much as possible.
>> >> >>> >>> >
>> >> >>> >>> >
>> >> >>> >>> > We meet the problem and post it out, we wish we could get
>> >> >>> >>> > input
>> >> >>> >>> > from
>> >> >>> >>> > community and go on the kernel building/tuning work to
>> >> >>> >>> > broaden
>> >> >>> >>> > the
>> >> >>> >>> > open64's
>> >> >>> >>> > application and improve the code quality.
>> >> >>> >>> >
>> >> >>> >>> > Thanks.
>> >> >>> >>> >
>> >> >>> >>> > Regards
>> >> >>> >>> > Gang
>> >> >>> >>> >
>> >> >>> >>> >
>> >> >>> >>> >
>> >> >>> >>> >
>> >> >>> >>> >
>> >> >>> >>> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >> >>> >>> > Ridiculously easy VDI. With Citrix VDI-in-a-Box, you don't
>> >> >>> >>> > need
>> >> >>> >>> > a
>> >> >>> >>> > complex
>> >> >>> >>> > infrastructure or vast IT resources to deliver seamless,
>> >> >>> >>> > secure
>> >> >>> >>> > access
>> >> >>> >>> > to
>> >> >>> >>> > virtual desktops. With this all-in-one solution, easily
>> >> >>> >>> > deploy
>> >> >>> >>> > virtual
>> >> >>> >>> > desktops for less than the cost of PCs and save 60% on VDI
>> >> >>> >>> > infrastructure
>> >> >>> >>> > costs. Try it free! http://p.sf.net/sfu/Citrix-VDIinabox
>> >> >>> >>> > _______________________________________________
>> >> >>> >>> > Open64-devel mailing list
>> >> >>> >>> > Open64-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
>> >> >>> >>> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/open64-devel
>> >> >>> >>> >
>> >> >>> >>
>> >> >>> >>
>> >> >>> >>
>> >> >>> >>
>> >> >>> >>
>> >> >>> >>
>> >> >>> >>
>> >> >>> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >> >>> >> Ridiculously easy VDI. With Citrix VDI-in-a-Box, you don't need
>> >> >>> >> a
>> >> >>> >> complex
>> >> >>> >> infrastructure or vast IT resources to deliver seamless, secure
>> >> >>> >> access
>> >> >>> >> to
>> >> >>> >> virtual desktops. With this all-in-one solution, easily deploy
>> >> >>> >> virtual
>> >> >>> >> desktops for less than the cost of PCs and save 60% on VDI
>> >> >>> >> infrastructure
>> >> >>> >> costs. Try it free! http://p.sf.net/sfu/Citrix-VDIinabox
>> >> >>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> >>> >> Open64-devel mailing list
>> >> >>> >> Open64-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
>> >> >>> >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/open64-devel
>> >> >>> >>
>> >> >>> >
>> >> >>> >
>> >> >>> >
>> >> >>> > --
>> >> >>> > http://www.lingcc.com
>> >> >>> >
>> >> >>> >
>> >> >>> >
>> >> >>> >
>> >> >>> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >> >>> > Ridiculously easy VDI. With Citrix VDI-in-a-Box, you don't need a
>> >> >>> > complex
>> >> >>> > infrastructure or vast IT resources to deliver seamless, secure
>> >> >>> > access
>> >> >>> > to
>> >> >>> > virtual desktops. With this all-in-one solution, easily deploy
>> >> >>> > virtual
>> >> >>> > desktops for less than the cost of PCs and save 60% on VDI
>> >> >>> > infrastructure
>> >> >>> > costs. Try it free! http://p.sf.net/sfu/Citrix-VDIinabox
>> >> >>> > _______________________________________________
>> >> >>> > Open64-devel mailing list
>> >> >>> > Open64-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
>> >> >>> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/open64-devel
>> >> >>> >
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >> >>> Ridiculously easy VDI. With Citrix VDI-in-a-Box, you don't need a
>> >> >>> complex
>> >> >>> infrastructure or vast IT resources to deliver seamless, secure
>> >> >>> access
>> >> >>> to
>> >> >>> virtual desktops. With this all-in-one solution, easily deploy
>> >> >>> virtual
>> >> >>> desktops for less than the cost of PCs and save 60% on VDI
>> >> >>> infrastructure
>> >> >>> costs. Try it free! http://p.sf.net/sfu/Citrix-VDIinabox
>> >> >>> _______________________________________________
>> >> >>> Open64-devel mailing list
>> >> >>> Open64-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
>> >> >>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/open64-devel
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >> >>> Ridiculously easy VDI. With Citrix VDI-in-a-Box, you don't need a
>> >> >>> complex
>> >> >>> infrastructure or vast IT resources to deliver seamless, secure
>> >> >>> access
>> >> >>> to
>> >> >>> virtual desktops. With this all-in-one solution, easily deploy
>> >> >>> virtual
>> >> >>> desktops for less than the cost of PCs and save 60% on VDI
>> >> >>> infrastructure
>> >> >>> costs. Try it free! http://p.sf.net/sfu/Citrix-VDIinabox
>> >> >>> _______________________________________________
>> >> >>> Open64-devel mailing list
>> >> >>> Open64-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
>> >> >>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/open64-devel
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > --
>> >> > http://www.lingcc.com
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >> > Write once. Port to many.
>> >> > Get the SDK and tools to simplify cross-platform app development.
>> >> > Create
>> >> > new or port existing apps to sell to consumers worldwide. Explore the
>> >> > Intel AppUpSM program developer opportunity.
>> >> > appdeveloper.intel.com/join
>> >> > http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-appdev
>> >> > _______________________________________________
>> >> > Open64-devel mailing list
>> >> > Open64-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
>> >> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/open64-devel
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> Regards,
>> >> Lai Jian-Xin
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > http://www.lingcc.com
>
>
>
>
> --
> http://www.lingcc.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Write once. Port to many.
Get the SDK and tools to simplify cross-platform app development. Create
new or port existing apps to sell to consumers worldwide. Explore the
Intel AppUpSM program developer opportunity. appdeveloper.intel.com/join
http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-appdev
_______________________________________________
Open64-devel mailing list
Open64-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/open64-devel
