From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@goop.org>
To: Segher Boessenkool <segher@kernel.crashing.org>
Cc: Robert Hancock <hancockr@shaw.ca>,
Christian Kujau <lists@nerdbynature.de>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Subject: Re: undefined reference to __udivdi3 (gcc-4.3)
Date: Wed, 07 May 2008 10:29:24 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <48217674.8080903@goop.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <a6dd201e0149f8dbdf10a7a194673833@kernel.crashing.org>
Segher Boessenkool wrote:
>> I assume it's one or both of these loops in arch/x86/xen/time.c
>> do_stolen_accounting() that are being optimized into a divide which
>> generates a libgcc call:
>>
>> while (stolen >= NS_PER_TICK) {
>> ticks++;
>> stolen -= NS_PER_TICK;
>> }
>>
>> or
>>
>> while (blocked >= NS_PER_TICK) {
>> ticks++;
>> blocked -= NS_PER_TICK;
>> }
>
> That looks plausible.
Yep. Probably both.
>> Not sure if that is a sustainable fix, though..
>
> It should be. The asm() arg tells GCC that the asm() could modify
> "ns" in some way, so GCC cannot optimise away the loop, since it
> doesn't have the required info about the induction variable to do
> that.
Yep, it's guaranteed to work. But it's an ugly hack to work around an
over-enthusiastic compiler, and so is an inherent maintainability burden.
I think the correct fix here is to introduce an iter_div_rem() function
which contains this hack, so we can avoid scattering it all over the
place. I'll cook up a patch.
J
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-05-07 9:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <fa.QTbvQYXhEm5VNP5dvkl5JG7NHYQ@ifi.uio.no>
2008-05-04 17:35 ` undefined reference to __udivdi3 (gcc-4.3) Robert Hancock
2008-05-04 22:19 ` Segher Boessenkool
2008-05-07 9:29 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge [this message]
2008-05-08 15:16 ` [PATCH] common implementation of iterative div/mod Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2008-05-08 20:26 ` Andrew Morton
2008-05-08 22:00 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2008-05-08 20:52 ` Segher Boessenkool
2008-05-08 21:57 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2008-05-09 11:45 ` Christian Kujau
2008-05-14 6:46 ` Andrew Morton
2008-05-14 7:33 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2008-05-14 8:33 ` Andi Kleen
2008-05-14 9:55 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2008-05-14 10:50 ` Andi Kleen
2008-05-14 10:52 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2008-05-14 11:21 ` Andi Kleen
2008-05-14 12:58 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2008-05-04 10:59 undefined reference to __udivdi3 (gcc-4.3) Christian Kujau
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=48217674.8080903@goop.org \
--to=jeremy@goop.org \
--cc=hancockr@shaw.ca \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lists@nerdbynature.de \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=segher@kernel.crashing.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.