From: Randy Dunlap Subject: Re: linux-next: Tree for November 29 (aesni-intel) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2010 10:54:03 -0800 Message-ID: <4CF3F6CB.8080904@oracle.com> References: <20101129140335.19800705.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> <20101129083105.e202e922.randy.dunlap@oracle.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Stephen Rothwell , Huang Ying , Vinodh Gopal , linux-next@vger.kernel.org, LKML , linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org To: Mathias Krause Return-path: Received: from rcsinet10.oracle.com ([148.87.113.121]:30367 "EHLO rcsinet10.oracle.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751896Ab0K2SyO (ORCPT ); Mon, 29 Nov 2010 13:54:14 -0500 In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-crypto-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 11/29/10 10:26, Mathias Krause wrote: > On 29.11.2010, 17:31 Randy Dunlap wrote: >> On Mon, 29 Nov 2010 14:03:35 +1100 Stephen Rothwell wrote: >> >>> Hi all, >>> >>> Changes since 20101126: >> >> >> on i386 builds, I get tons of these (and more) errors: >> >> arch/x86/crypto/aesni-intel_asm.S:841: Error: bad register name `%r12' >> arch/x86/crypto/aesni-intel_asm.S:842: Error: bad register name `%r13' >> arch/x86/crypto/aesni-intel_asm.S:843: Error: bad register name `%r14' >> arch/x86/crypto/aesni-intel_asm.S:844: Error: bad register name `%rsp' >> arch/x86/crypto/aesni-intel_asm.S:849: Error: bad register name `%rsp' >> arch/x86/crypto/aesni-intel_asm.S:850: Error: bad register name `%rsp' >> arch/x86/crypto/aesni-intel_asm.S:851: Error: bad register name `%r9' >> >> even though the kernel .config file says: >> >> CONFIG_CRYPTO_AES=m >> CONFIG_CRYPTO_AES_586=m >> CONFIG_CRYPTO_AES_NI_INTEL=m >> >> Should arch/x86/crypto/aesni-intel_asm.S be testing >> #ifdef CONFIG_X86_64 >> instead of >> #ifdef __x86_64__ >> or does that not matter? >> >> or is this a toolchain issue? > > Well, __x86_64__ should be a build-in define of the compiler while > CONFIG_X86_64 is defined for 64 bit builds in include/generated/autoconf.h. > So by using the latter we should be on the safe side but if your compiler > defines __x86_64__ for 32-bit builds it's simply broken. Also git grep > showed quite a few more places using __x86_64__ so those would miscompile on > your toolchain, too. > > But it looks like linux-next is just missing > 559ad0ff1368baea14dbc3207d55b02bd69bda4b from Herbert's git repo at > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/herbert/cryptodev-2.6.git. > That should fix the build issue. The build problem still happens when that patch is applied. -- ~Randy *** Remember to use Documentation/SubmitChecklist when testing your code ***