On Sun, Jan 1, 2017 at 5:32 PM, Zhiyi Sun wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> This "inline asm not supported" issue is caused by below asm code in
> arch/arm64/include/asm/sysreg.h.
>
> asm(
> " .irp
> num,0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29,30\n"
> "
Hello all,
This "inline asm not supported" issue is caused by below asm code in
arch/arm64/include/asm/sysreg.h.
asm(
" .irp
num,0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29,30\n"
" .equ.L__reg_num_x\\num, \\num\n"
" .endr\n"
" .equ
On Sun, Jan 1, 2017 at 5:17 AM, Chaiken, Alison wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 9:44 PM, Ming Lei >>>
>> that raw asm outside of any function body comes from
>> arch/arm64/include/asm/sysreg.h
>> it obviously cannot work with any crosscompiler.
>> That's why we have -D__ASM_SY
On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 9:44 PM, Ming Lei
>> that raw asm outside of any function body comes from
>> arch/arm64/include/asm/sysreg.h
>> it obviously cannot work with any crosscompiler.
>> That's why we have -D__ASM_SYSREG_H in samples/bpf/Makefile
[ . . ]
> Yes, passing '-D__ASM_SYSREG_H' just
On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 8:43 AM, Brenden Blanco wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 10:38 PM, Alexei Starovoitov
> wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 10:33 PM, Ming Lei wrote:
>> > On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 2:11 PM, Alexei Starovoitov
>> > wrote:
>> >> On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 9:44 PM, Ming Lei
On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 10:38 PM, Alexei Starovoitov <
alexei.starovoi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 10:33 PM, Ming Lei wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 2:11 PM, Alexei Starovoitov
> > wrote:
> >> On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 9:44 PM, Ming Lei
> wrote:
> >>>
> so you can send
Given these discussions, I'm a bit puzzled as to why an arm64 Ubuntu
package even exists if there are all these problems with raw asm. Did
whoever built the package not ever test it? Is there a current user of
bcc tools on arm64 who will attest that it ever works?
Thanks,
Alison
---
Alison
On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 10:33 PM, Ming Lei wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 2:11 PM, Alexei Starovoitov
> wrote:
>> On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 9:44 PM, Ming Lei wrote:
>>>
so you can send me a pre-processed .c file or even better .ll file ?
I don't have arm64 to reproduce it...
>>>
>>> Pl
On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 2:11 PM, Alexei Starovoitov
wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 9:44 PM, Ming Lei wrote:
>>
>>> so you can send me a pre-processed .c file or even better .ll file ?
>>> I don't have arm64 to reproduce it...
>>
>> Please see the whole log of building the prog.
>
> that raw asm
On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 9:44 PM, Ming Lei wrote:
>
>> so you can send me a pre-processed .c file or even better .ll file ?
>> I don't have arm64 to reproduce it...
>
> Please see the whole log of building the prog.
that raw asm outside of any function body comes from
arch/arm64/include/asm/sysreg
On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 11:24 AM, Alexei Starovoitov
wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 11, 2016 at 5:27 PM, Ming Lei via iovisor-dev
> wrote:
>> On Sun, Dec 11, 2016 at 9:21 AM, Chaiken, Alison via iovisor-dev
>> wrote:
>>> Ming Lei inquires:
>>>
>>> Bcc can be installed on ubuntu 16.04/arm64 successfully,
On Sun, Dec 11, 2016 at 5:27 PM, Ming Lei via iovisor-dev
wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 11, 2016 at 9:21 AM, Chaiken, Alison via iovisor-dev
> wrote:
>> Ming Lei inquires:
>>
>> Bcc can be installed on ubuntu 16.04/arm64 successfully, but when
>> I try to trace, the folllowing failure[1] is triggered.
>>
On 2016-12-11 17:27, Ming Lei wrote:
I didn't see your issue, and with the workaound in the following link:
https://github.com/iovisor/bcc/issues/492
bcc can be built successfully on ubuntu 16.04 both arm64 and x86.
Thanks for the suggestion, but I got cmake to work just fine. Thus I'
On Sun, Dec 11, 2016 at 9:21 AM, Chaiken, Alison via iovisor-dev
wrote:
> Ming Lei inquires:
>
> Bcc can be installed on ubuntu 16.04/arm64 successfully, but when
> I try to trace, the folllowing failure[1] is triggered.
> So is bcc not ready for arm64? Or something is wrong?
Also for the prog b
Ming Lei inquires:
> Bcc can be installed on ubuntu 16.04/arm64 successfully, but when
> I try to trace, the folllowing failure[1] is triggered.
> So is bcc not ready for arm64? Or something is wrong?
[ . . . ]
> In file included from ./arch/arm64/include/asm/cputype.h:94:
> ./arch/arm64/incl
Hi,
Bcc can be installed on ubuntu 16.04/arm64 successfully, but when
I try to trace, the folllowing failure[1] is triggered.
So is bcc not ready for arm64? Or something is wrong?
BTW, clang/llvm is 3.8, and I am happy to try any patches/tests
if you have ideas about the issue.
Thanks,
Ming
[1
Hi Alexei,
Thank you for so quick response!
On Fri, Dec 9, 2016 at 12:37 AM, Alexei Starovoitov
wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 8, 2016 at 8:20 AM, Ming Lei via iovisor-dev
> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Bcc can be installed on ubuntu 16.04/arm64 successfully, but when
>> I try to trace, the folllowing failure[1]
On Thu, Dec 8, 2016 at 8:20 AM, Ming Lei via iovisor-dev
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Bcc can be installed on ubuntu 16.04/arm64 successfully, but when
> I try to trace, the folllowing failure[1] is triggered.
>
> So is bcc not ready for arm64? Or something is wrong?
>
> BTW, clang/llvm is 3.8, and I am happy
Hi,
Bcc can be installed on ubuntu 16.04/arm64 successfully, but when
I try to trace, the folllowing failure[1] is triggered.
So is bcc not ready for arm64? Or something is wrong?
BTW, clang/llvm is 3.8, and I am happy to try any patches/tests
if you have ideas about the issue.
Thanks,
Ming
[1
19 matches
Mail list logo
