Message ID | CAMe9rOryTptyXVUoYME_WV7H_tTTh-33Eb=4KgeMcM3-vzipKA@mail.gmail.com |
---|---|
State | Committed |
Headers |
Return-Path: <x14307373@homiemail-mx22.g.dreamhost.com> X-Original-To: siddhesh@wilcox.dreamhost.com Delivered-To: siddhesh@wilcox.dreamhost.com Received: from homiemail-mx22.g.dreamhost.com (caibbdcaabij.dreamhost.com [208.113.200.189]) by wilcox.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1212C3600D4 for <siddhesh@wilcox.dreamhost.com>; Fri, 14 Mar 2014 08:30:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: by homiemail-mx22.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix, from userid 14307373) id B7DD44CEB2AB; Fri, 14 Mar 2014 08:30:48 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: glibc@patchwork.siddhesh.in Delivered-To: x14307373@homiemail-mx22.g.dreamhost.com Received: from sourceware.org (server1.sourceware.org [209.132.180.131]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by homiemail-mx22.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5E8CA4D70D60 for <glibc@patchwork.siddhesh.in>; Fri, 14 Mar 2014 08:30:47 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id :list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post :list-help:sender:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; q=dns; s=default; b= RE4BcHOjjXvRpyoRcIia/cbR3RZC1wWTWokVewGaxdH0vNJ0DjoRjVGLIfX2qwSX b6qdOQ3UWJLJuRYmH3th9Kqhcytf43dGIlD/4dFmnCIvdUfgR0ofvizYoLdZ2kZT OZ4eQlUacPyxAILs2FfT9/flnJnX+FJRyUGtWgvhm1M= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id :list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post :list-help:sender:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; s=default; bh=zfc9i mCYHooR8w35JY2xFKw40LI=; b=AkwfbQwxebKxrfRvV1bOLEwNsebIpaQFtXRUf dO5ph5SMg+vkK3oP2L22qXltcio6WhcAckqZhQpuwPjuRCbj6dZ6ZgcjwHJ7OjIf yRpbL62JzNRmgKPwH7BBpTIwiDBxSg7LTPOs8u1POzky7kgRsi1KDBIKWR6y5AOP bHyQIA= Received: (qmail 4962 invoked by alias); 14 Mar 2014 15:30:44 -0000 Mailing-List: contact libc-alpha-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: <libc-alpha.sourceware.org> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:libc-alpha-unsubscribe-glibc=patchwork.siddhesh.in@sourceware.org> List-Subscribe: <mailto:libc-alpha-subscribe@sourceware.org> List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/> List-Post: <mailto:libc-alpha@sourceware.org> List-Help: <mailto:libc-alpha-help@sourceware.org>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs> Sender: libc-alpha-owner@sourceware.org Delivered-To: mailing list libc-alpha@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 4944 invoked by uid 89); 14 Mar 2014 15:30:43 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL, BAYES_00, FREEMAIL_FROM, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW, SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: mail-oa0-f43.google.com MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.182.81.197 with SMTP id c5mr7431513oby.40.1394811040953; Fri, 14 Mar 2014 08:30:40 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <CAMe9rOoA3oEsghYtFrSxaBN8qYpKMKPpAcY8rbD6R4CgYaK+=A@mail.gmail.com> References: <CALoOobNeYiMjoxQ0zTJqrZwEmMaVJV1W5nY8cyW9aA55VC5WeA@mail.gmail.com> <CAMe9rOoA3oEsghYtFrSxaBN8qYpKMKPpAcY8rbD6R4CgYaK+=A@mail.gmail.com> Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2014 08:30:40 -0700 Message-ID: <CAMe9rOryTptyXVUoYME_WV7H_tTTh-33Eb=4KgeMcM3-vzipKA@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: Commit 2d63a517e4084ec80403cd9f278690fa8b676cc4 From: "H.J. Lu" <hjl.tools@gmail.com> To: Paul Pluzhnikov <ppluzhnikov@google.com> Cc: Igor Zamyatin <igor.zamyatin@intel.com>, GLIBC Devel <libc-alpha@sourceware.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-DH-Original-To: glibc@patchwork.siddhesh.in |
Commit Message
H.J. Lu
March 14, 2014, 3:30 p.m. UTC
On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 7:41 PM, H.J. Lu <hjl.tools@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 6:57 PM, Paul Pluzhnikov <ppluzhnikov@google.com> wrote: >> After latest commit: >> >> commit 2d63a517e4084ec80403cd9f278690fa8b676cc4 >> Author: Igor Zamyatin <igor.zamyatin@intel.com> >> Date: Thu Mar 13 11:10:22 2014 -0700 >> >> Save and restore AVX-512 zmm registers to x86-64 ld.so >> ... >> >> "make check" fails like this for me: >> >> >> /tmp/ccJEXrrY.s: Assembler messages: >> /tmp/ccJEXrrY.s:47: Error: no such instruction: `vmovdqa64 %zmm0,-176(%rbp)' >> /tmp/ccJEXrrY.s:51: Error: bad register name `%zmm0' >> /tmp/ccJEXrrY.s:57: Error: no such instruction: `vmovdqa64 %zmm1,-240(%rbp)' >> /tmp/ccJEXrrY.s:58: Error: no such instruction: `vmovdqa64 %zmm2,-304(%rbp)' >> /tmp/ccJEXrrY.s:59: Error: no such instruction: `vmovdqa64 %zmm3,-368(%rbp)' >> /tmp/ccJEXrrY.s:60: Error: no such instruction: `vmovdqa64 %zmm4,-432(%rbp)' >> /tmp/ccJEXrrY.s:61: Error: no such instruction: `vmovdqa64 %zmm5,-496(%rbp)' >> /tmp/ccJEXrrY.s:62: Error: no such instruction: `vmovdqa64 %zmm6,-560(%rbp)' >> /tmp/ccJEXrrY.s:63: Error: no such instruction: `vmovdqa64 %zmm7,-624(%rbp)' >> /tmp/ccJEXrrY.s:65: Error: no such instruction: `vmovdqa64 %zmm0,-112(%rbp)' >> /tmp/ccJEXrrY.s:84: Error: bad register name `%zmm0' >> /tmp/ccJEXrrY.s:90: Error: no such instruction: `vmovdqa64 %zmm0,-112(%rbp)' >> ... >> make[2]: *** [/build/elf/tst-auditmod10a.os] Error 1 >> >> >> Likely my binutils/as are too old. Should this test be conditional? > > You have GCC 4.9 and a very old binutils. We didn't test this combination. I am testing this patch. It checks AVX-512 assembler support first and sets libc_cv_cc_avx512 to $libc_cv_asm_avx512, instead of yes. GCC won't support AVX-512 if assembler doesn't support it. I will check it in if all tests pass. Sorry for the inconvenience. Thanks.
Comments
On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 8:30 AM, H.J. Lu <hjl.tools@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 7:41 PM, H.J. Lu <hjl.tools@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 6:57 PM, Paul Pluzhnikov <ppluzhnikov@google.com> wrote: >>> After latest commit: >>> >>> commit 2d63a517e4084ec80403cd9f278690fa8b676cc4 >>> Author: Igor Zamyatin <igor.zamyatin@intel.com> >>> Date: Thu Mar 13 11:10:22 2014 -0700 >>> >>> Save and restore AVX-512 zmm registers to x86-64 ld.so >>> ... >>> >>> "make check" fails like this for me: >>> >>> >>> /tmp/ccJEXrrY.s: Assembler messages: >>> /tmp/ccJEXrrY.s:47: Error: no such instruction: `vmovdqa64 %zmm0,-176(%rbp)' >>> /tmp/ccJEXrrY.s:51: Error: bad register name `%zmm0' >>> /tmp/ccJEXrrY.s:57: Error: no such instruction: `vmovdqa64 %zmm1,-240(%rbp)' >>> /tmp/ccJEXrrY.s:58: Error: no such instruction: `vmovdqa64 %zmm2,-304(%rbp)' >>> /tmp/ccJEXrrY.s:59: Error: no such instruction: `vmovdqa64 %zmm3,-368(%rbp)' >>> /tmp/ccJEXrrY.s:60: Error: no such instruction: `vmovdqa64 %zmm4,-432(%rbp)' >>> /tmp/ccJEXrrY.s:61: Error: no such instruction: `vmovdqa64 %zmm5,-496(%rbp)' >>> /tmp/ccJEXrrY.s:62: Error: no such instruction: `vmovdqa64 %zmm6,-560(%rbp)' >>> /tmp/ccJEXrrY.s:63: Error: no such instruction: `vmovdqa64 %zmm7,-624(%rbp)' >>> /tmp/ccJEXrrY.s:65: Error: no such instruction: `vmovdqa64 %zmm0,-112(%rbp)' >>> /tmp/ccJEXrrY.s:84: Error: bad register name `%zmm0' >>> /tmp/ccJEXrrY.s:90: Error: no such instruction: `vmovdqa64 %zmm0,-112(%rbp)' >>> ... >>> make[2]: *** [/build/elf/tst-auditmod10a.os] Error 1 >>> >>> >>> Likely my binutils/as are too old. Should this test be conditional? >> >> You have GCC 4.9 and a very old binutils. We didn't test this combination. > > I am testing this patch. It checks AVX-512 assembler support first and > sets libc_cv_cc_avx512 to $libc_cv_asm_avx512, instead of yes. GCC > won't support AVX-512 if assembler doesn't support it. I will check it > in if all tests pass. Sorry for the inconvenience. > I checked it in: commit aa4de9cea5c07d43caeaca9722c2d417e9a2919c Author: H.J. Lu <hjl.tools@gmail.com> Date: Fri Mar 14 08:51:25 2014 -0700 Check AVX-512 assembler support first It checks AVX-512 assembler support first and sets libc_cv_cc_avx512 to $libc_cv_asm_avx512, instead of yes. GCC won't support AVX-512 if assembler doesn't support it. * sysdeps/x86_64/configure.ac: Check AVX-512 assembler support first. Disable AVX-512 GCC support if assembler doesn't support it. * sysdeps/x86_64/configure: Regenerated.
On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 8:53 AM, H.J. Lu <hjl.tools@gmail.com> wrote:
> I checked it in:
I was just about to comment.
The patch doesn't appear to fix the problem: while it does set
libc_cv_asm_avx512=no, I still get an error at "make check".
AFAICT, tst-auditmod10 is not conditional on asm_avx512.
/tmp/ccha40tw.s: Assembler messages:
/tmp/ccha40tw.s:47: Error: no such instruction: `vmovdqa64 %zmm0,-176(%rbp)'
/tmp/ccha40tw.s:51: Error: bad register name `%zmm0'
...
make[2]: *** [/build/elf/tst-auditmod10a.os] Error 1
Here is what AVX in my config.log looks like:
libc_cv_asm_avx512=no
libc_cv_cc_avx512=yes
libc_cv_cc_avx=yes
libc_cv_cc_sse2avx=yes
Please note: I am not complaining and could easily update my assembler,
if that's the right thing to do here.
For the record:
gcc --version
gcc (GCC) 4.9.0 20140309 (experimental)
...
gcc -Wa,--version -xc /dev/null
GNU assembler (GNU Binutils) 2.22.52.20120719
...
Thanks,
On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 9:08 AM, Paul Pluzhnikov <ppluzhnikov@google.com> wrote: > On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 8:53 AM, H.J. Lu <hjl.tools@gmail.com> wrote: > >> I checked it in: > > I was just about to comment. > > The patch doesn't appear to fix the problem: while it does set > libc_cv_asm_avx512=no, I still get an error at "make check". > > AFAICT, tst-auditmod10 is not conditional on asm_avx512. > > /tmp/ccha40tw.s: Assembler messages: > /tmp/ccha40tw.s:47: Error: no such instruction: `vmovdqa64 %zmm0,-176(%rbp)' > /tmp/ccha40tw.s:51: Error: bad register name `%zmm0' > ... > make[2]: *** [/build/elf/tst-auditmod10a.os] Error 1 > > Here is what AVX in my config.log looks like: > > libc_cv_asm_avx512=no > libc_cv_cc_avx512=yes > libc_cv_cc_avx=yes > libc_cv_cc_sse2avx=yes > > Did you remove the old glibc build directory first? Please show me the output of: # grep -i AVX512 config.h config.make I got config.h:/* Define if compiler supports AVX512. */ config.h:/* #undef HAVE_AVX512_SUPPORT */ config.h:/* Define if assembler supports AVX512. */ config.h:/* #undef HAVE_AVX512_ASM_SUPPORT */ config.make:config-cflags-avx512 = no with GCC 4.9 and binutils 2.23.51.
On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 9:34 AM, H.J. Lu <hjl.tools@gmail.com> wrote: > Did you remove the old glibc build directory first? No, I did not. After doing that, the new failures are indeed gone. Thanks for the fix! > Please show > me the output of: > > # grep -i AVX512 config.h config.make > > I got > > config.h:/* Define if compiler supports AVX512. */ > config.h:/* #undef HAVE_AVX512_SUPPORT */ > config.h:/* Define if assembler supports AVX512. */ > config.h:/* #undef HAVE_AVX512_ASM_SUPPORT */ > config.make:config-cflags-avx512 = no I've got the same output.
diff --git a/sysdeps/x86_64/configure.ac b/sysdeps/x86_64/configure.ac index 5e5d61b..d34f9a8 100644 --- a/sysdeps/x86_64/configure.ac +++ b/sysdeps/x86_64/configure.ac @@ -23,15 +23,6 @@ if test $libc_cv_cc_avx = yes; then fi LIBC_CONFIG_VAR([config-cflags-avx], [$libc_cv_cc_avx]) -dnl Check if -mavx512f works. -AC_CACHE_CHECK(for AVX512 support, libc_cv_cc_avx512, [dnl -LIBC_TRY_CC_OPTION([-mavx512f], [libc_cv_cc_avx512=yes], [libc_cv_cc_avx512=no]) -]) -if test $libc_cv_cc_avx512 = yes; then - AC_DEFINE(HAVE_AVX512_SUPPORT) -fi -LIBC_CONFIG_VAR([config-cflags-avx512], [$libc_cv_cc_avx512]) - dnl Check if asm supports AVX512. AC_CACHE_CHECK(for AVX512 support in assembler, libc_cv_asm_avx512, [dnl