On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 11:39 AM, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
<f4...@amsat.org> wrote:
> (incorrectly use in 3be98be4e9f)
>
> Signed-off-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <f4...@amsat.org>
> ---
> currently on ppc32 the linking fails:
Well armel and armhf hosts are also failing since 3be98be4e9f.
>
> CC migration/postcopy-ram.o
> ...
> LINK microblaze-softmmu/qemu-system-microblaze
> ../migration/postcopy-ram.o: In function `mark_postcopy_blocktime_end':
> migration/postcopy-ram.c:717: undefined reference to `__atomic_fetch_add_8'
> migration/postcopy-ram.c:738: undefined reference to `__atomic_fetch_add_8'
> ../migration/postcopy-ram.o: In function `mark_postcopy_blocktime_begin':
> migration/postcopy-ram.c:651: undefined reference to `__atomic_exchange_8'
> migration/postcopy-ram.c:652: undefined reference to `__atomic_exchange_8'
> migration/postcopy-ram.c:661: undefined reference to `__atomic_exchange_8'
> collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status
> Makefile:193: recipe for target 'qemu-system-microblaze' failed
> make[1]: *** [qemu-system-microblaze] Error 1
>
> with this patch the compilation fails:
>
> CC migration/postcopy-ram.o
> In file included from include/qemu/osdep.h:36:0,
> from migration/postcopy-ram.c:19:
> migration/postcopy-ram.c: In function 'mark_postcopy_blocktime_begin':
> include/qemu/compiler.h:86:30: error: static assertion failed: "not
> expecting: sizeof(*&dc->last_begin) > ATOMIC_REG_SIZE"
> #define QEMU_BUILD_BUG_ON(x) _Static_assert(!(x), "not expecting: " #x)
> ^
> include/qemu/atomic.h:183:5: note: in expansion of macro 'QEMU_BUILD_BUG_ON'
> QEMU_BUILD_BUG_ON(sizeof(*ptr) > ATOMIC_REG_SIZE); \
> ^
> migration/postcopy-ram.c:651:5: note: in expansion of macro 'atomic_xchg'
> atomic_xchg(&dc->last_begin, now_ms);
> ^
>
> migration/postcopy-ram.c | 12 ++++++------
> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/migration/postcopy-ram.c b/migration/postcopy-ram.c
> index 7814da5b4b..6ecc1aa820 100644
> --- a/migration/postcopy-ram.c
> +++ b/migration/postcopy-ram.c
> @@ -648,17 +648,17 @@ static void mark_postcopy_blocktime_begin(uintptr_t
> addr, uint32_t ptid,
> atomic_inc(&dc->smp_cpus_down);
> }
>
> - atomic_xchg__nocheck(&dc->last_begin, now_ms);
> - atomic_xchg__nocheck(&dc->page_fault_vcpu_time[cpu], now_ms);
> - atomic_xchg__nocheck(&dc->vcpu_addr[cpu], addr);
> + atomic_xchg(&dc->last_begin, now_ms);
> + atomic_xchg(&dc->page_fault_vcpu_time[cpu], now_ms);
> + atomic_xchg(&dc->vcpu_addr[cpu], addr);
>
> /* check it here, not at the begining of the function,
> * due to, check could accur early than bitmap_set in
> * qemu_ufd_copy_ioctl */
> already_received = ramblock_recv_bitmap_test(rb, (void *)addr);
> if (already_received) {
> - atomic_xchg__nocheck(&dc->vcpu_addr[cpu], 0);
> - atomic_xchg__nocheck(&dc->page_fault_vcpu_time[cpu], 0);
> + atomic_xchg(&dc->vcpu_addr[cpu], 0);
> + atomic_xchg(&dc->page_fault_vcpu_time[cpu], 0);
> atomic_dec(&dc->smp_cpus_down);
> }
> trace_mark_postcopy_blocktime_begin(addr, dc,
> dc->page_fault_vcpu_time[cpu],
> @@ -719,7 +719,7 @@ static void mark_postcopy_blocktime_end(uintptr_t addr)
> read_vcpu_time == 0) {
> continue;
> }
> - atomic_xchg__nocheck(&dc->vcpu_addr[i], 0);
> + atomic_xchg(&dc->vcpu_addr[i], 0);
> vcpu_blocktime = now_ms - read_vcpu_time;
> affected_cpu += 1;
> /* we need to know is that mark_postcopy_end was due to
> --
> 2.15.1
>
