Date: Sat, 8 Apr 2023 21:40:37 -0500 From: Kyle Evans <kevans@freebsd.org> To: Mateusz Guzik <mjguzik@gmail.com> Cc: Kyle Evans <kevans@freebsd.org>, Mark Millard <marklmi@yahoo.com>, dev-commits-src-main@freebsd.org, Current FreeBSD <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>, freebsd-arm <freebsd-arm@freebsd.org>, John F Carr <jfc@mit.edu> Subject: Re: git: 2a58b312b62f - main - zfs: merge openzfs/zfs@431083f75 [separate aarch64 panic for zpool import] Message-ID: <CACNAnaG3m7%2BBmJFYdBHnQLhtnwzTX1f4da2ro%2Bugz6%2BZN6y=xg@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <CAGudoHE2XgG0-zNyfBTRHPqTrXsVy5GuTu=USHLHmp1qqXgHSQ@mail.gmail.com> References: <F6C7D902-88AD-4725-A63B-CCE2960CCB3B.ref@yahoo.com> <F6C7D902-88AD-4725-A63B-CCE2960CCB3B@yahoo.com> <CAGudoHEuMj8hf2=BjN30udi2nxN7QgU8nRvmikj7tFLAJg5dWw@mail.gmail.com> <CAGudoHFt3aonOXJsgYTLwSY141p1YjGOrcO2t1vocDLXZuXyTA@mail.gmail.com> <3A019D10-E520-4C11-AE9F-4EA5D99B9B07@yahoo.com> <CAGudoHGc76uuMVR9EJhTQs-4rO%2BnrO4FTxzEWQgeTrY6aR5z=Q@mail.gmail.com> <CACNAnaGT-10vHvyNN7MxQZqQdWUekPiNpzio2QFwji0UiuczCg@mail.gmail.com> <CAGudoHE2XgG0-zNyfBTRHPqTrXsVy5GuTu=USHLHmp1qqXgHSQ@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, Apr 8, 2023 at 5:24=E2=80=AFAM Mateusz Guzik <mjguzik@gmail.com> wr= ote: > > On 4/8/23, Kyle Evans <kevans@freebsd.org> wrote: > > On Fri, Apr 7, 2023 at 4:54=E2=80=AFPM Mateusz Guzik <mjguzik@gmail.com= > wrote: > >> > >> On 4/7/23, Mark Millard <marklmi@yahoo.com> wrote: > >> > On Apr 7, 2023, at 14:26, Mateusz Guzik <mjguzik@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > > >> >> On 4/7/23, Mateusz Guzik <mjguzik@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >>> can you try with this: > >> >>> > >> >>> diff --git > >> >>> a/sys/contrib/openzfs/include/os/linux/kernel/linux/simd_aarch64.h > >> >>> b/sys/contrib/openzfs/include/os/linux/kernel/linux/simd_aarch64.h > >> >>> index 16276b08c759..e1bca9ef140a 100644 > >> >>> --- > >> >>> a/sys/contrib/openzfs/include/os/linux/kernel/linux/simd_aarch64.h > >> >>> +++ > >> >>> b/sys/contrib/openzfs/include/os/linux/kernel/linux/simd_aarch64.h > >> >>> @@ -71,7 +71,7 @@ > >> >>> #define ID_AA64PFR0_EL1 sys_reg(3, 0, 0, 1, 0) > >> >>> #define ID_AA64ISAR0_EL1 sys_reg(3, 0, 0, 6, 0) > >> >>> > >> >>> -#define kfpu_allowed() 1 > >> >>> +#define kfpu_allowed() 0 > >> >>> #define kfpu_begin() kernel_neon_begin() > >> >>> #define kfpu_end() kernel_neon_end() > >> >>> #define kfpu_init() (0) > >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >> > >> >> ops, wrong file > >> >> > >> >> diff --git a/sys/contrib/openzfs/include/os/freebsd/spl/sys/simd_ar= m.h > >> >> b/sys/contrib/openzfs/include/os/freebsd/spl/sys/simd_arm.h > >> >> index 178fbc3b3c6e..c462220289d6 100644 > >> >> --- a/sys/contrib/openzfs/include/os/freebsd/spl/sys/simd_arm.h > >> >> +++ b/sys/contrib/openzfs/include/os/freebsd/spl/sys/simd_arm.h > >> >> @@ -46,7 +46,7 @@ > >> >> #include <machine/elf.h> > >> >> #include <machine/md_var.h> > >> >> > >> >> -#define kfpu_allowed() 1 > >> >> +#define kfpu_allowed() 0 > >> >> #define kfpu_initialize(tsk) do {} while (0) > >> >> #define kfpu_begin() do {} while (0) > >> >> #define kfpu_end() do {} while (0) > >> > > >> > It will take me a bit to setup a separate build/install > >> > context for the source code vintage involved. Then more > >> > time to do the build, install, and test. (I'm keeping > >> > my normal environments completely before the mess.) > >> > > >> > FYI: > >> > > >> > I have used the artifact build just after your pair of zfs > >> > related updates to confirm the VFP problem is still in > >> > place as of that point: > >> > > >> > https://artifact.ci.freebsd.org/snapshot/main/5e2e3615d91f9c0c688987= 915ff5c8de23c22bde/arm64/aarch64/kernel.txz > >> > > >> > (No artifact build was exactly at either of your commits.) > >> > > >> > =3D=3D=3D > >> > Mark Millard > >> > marklmi at yahoo.com > >> > > >> > > >> > >> I have arm64 + zfs at $job and just verified the above lets it boot > >> again, so I committed already. > >> > > > > This was a known issue that we were working on fixing properly over in > > https://reviews.freebsd.org/D39448... this really could have waited > > just a little bit longer. This problem was already brought up in > > response to the commit in question days ago. > > > > Mate, that's one confusing email. > Sorry, this was misdirected anger around this series of crappery. > I had seen the upstream review, apparently there is opposition to the > patch, it is clearly not going to land within hours. > The opposition is notably from a person that does not actually work on this platform, and IMO has no bearing on our downstream review. We'll get past him eventually, because this is what needs to happen. > Whatever the Real Fix(tm) might be, I'm confident my change has no > impact on work on it, past the need to flip kfpu_allowed back to 1. > > At the same time things were broken to the point where aarch64 + zfs > literally did not boot. Once more, I fail to see how restoring basic > operation by fipping a macro to 0 throws any wrenches into the effort > to get simd working. > Thanks! > If anything the question is how come a clearly *not* implemented simd > support got kfpu_allowed set to 1. > Your guess is as good as mine -- it clearly could not have been tested at all, I have no clue why they didn't err on the side of caution and avoid fpu usage. Thanks, Kyle Evans
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CACNAnaG3m7%2BBmJFYdBHnQLhtnwzTX1f4da2ro%2Bugz6%2BZN6y=xg>