From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from relay.sgi.com (relay1.corp.sgi.com [137.38.102.111]) by oss.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 38B897F37 for ; Thu, 24 Sep 2015 03:22:08 -0500 (CDT) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda1.sgi.com [192.48.157.11]) by relay1.corp.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 187488F804B for ; Thu, 24 Sep 2015 01:22:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp-tls.univ-nantes.fr (smtptls2-lmb.cpub.univ-nantes.fr [193.52.103.111]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id pJGDEl2StYcIB61m for ; Thu, 24 Sep 2015 01:21:57 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: xfstests, bad generic tests 009 and 308 References: <55FC3E0E.9060506@nomovok.com> <20150918224412.GE26895@dastard> <55FFE665.7040004@nomovok.com> <20150921225244.GD19114@dastard> <56028249.7040103@univ-nantes.fr> <20150923220444.GP19114@dastard> From: Yann Dupont - Veille Techno Message-ID: <5603B240.4030609@univ-nantes.fr> Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2015 10:20:16 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20150923220444.GP19114@dastard> List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; Format="flowed" Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: Dave Chinner Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com Le 24/09/2015 00:04, Dave Chinner a =E9crit : > On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 12:43:21PM +0200, Yann Dupont - Veille Techno wro= te: >> Le 22/09/2015 00:52, Dave Chinner a =E9crit : >>> As it is, I highly recommend that you try a current 4.3 kernel, as >>> there are several code fixes in the XFS kernel code that work >>> around compiler issues we know about. AFAIA, the do_div() asm bug >>> that trips recent gcc optimisations isn't in the upstream kernel >>> yet, but that can be worked around by setting >>> CONFIG_CC_OPTIMIZE_FOR_SIZE=3Dy in your build. >> Hi dave, >> >> I can confirm that CONFIG_CC_OPTIMIZE_FOR_SIZE=3Dy is (was ?) the only >> way for me to have reliable XFS kernel code on different arm >> platforms (Marvell kirkwood, Allwinner A20, Amlogic S805), no matter >> what recent gcc version I've been using. >> >> I must admit I was cross-compiling from X86-64 too, but I think (not >> sure) that it was also the case with native gcc. >> >> I must also admit that I didn't tried since some months, because >> CONFIG_CC_OPTIMIZE_FOR_SIZE=3Dy was the silver bullet for arm xfs >> kernel crashes. This crash was difficult to understand because it >> occurs quite randomly (I.e it can take several hours to trigger) >> >> If there's a patch floating around for gcc (or kernel), I'm >> interested to test. > See this subthread from august: > > http://oss.sgi.com/archives/xfs/2015-08/msg00234.html Oh, missed this thread. Thanks a lot for the pointer, will try this patch ! Cheers, _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs