Re: {standard input}:136: Error: number (0x9000000080000000) larger than 32 bits

From	"Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@imgtec.com>
Newsgroups	linux.kernel
Subject	Re: {standard input}:136: Error: number (0x9000000080000000) larger than 32 bits
Date	2016-04-19 02:30 +0200
Message-ID	<rprIe-6oT-19@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References	(2 earlier) <roWbn-5VG-5@gated-at.bofh.it> <rphzc-6pz-5@gated-at.bofh.it> <rpilz-75e-7@gated-at.bofh.it> <rpjKH-82N-17@gated-at.bofh.it> <rplWa-1vv-3@gated-at.bofh.it>
Organization	linux.* mail to news gateway

Show all headers | View raw

On Mon, 18 Apr 2016, Maciej W. Rozycki wrote:

>  The thing is that to match some software's (such as ours) requirements an 
> ISA override -- as a side effect -- relaxes ABI restrictions on certain 
> operations.  E.g. the DLI macro and its 64-bit immediate argument are not 
> valid in the o32 ABI.  When no actual override happens, such as with 
> `-march=r4600' which already implies `mips3' for the ISA, the side effect 
> is lost:
> 
>   /* The use of .set [arch|cpu]= historically 'fixes' the width of gp and fp
>      registers based on what is supported by the arch/cpu.  */
>   if (mips_opts.isa != prev_isa)

 It's worse yet actually, as operations such as `.set pop' and `.set 
mips0' may not restore the ABI restrictions, possibly leading to wrong 
code generation elsewhere, generally in handcoded assembly only.  This can 
be illustrated with a program like:

	.set	push
	.set	mips3
	dli	$2, 0x9000000080000000
	.set	mips0
	dli	$2, 0x9000000080000000
	.set	mips3
	.set	pop
	dli	$2, 0x9000000080000000

-- try building it with `-mips3' and `-mips4' to see how it fails or 
succeeds to assemble all the three DLI macros respectively, where it is 
supposed to succeed with the first macro only and fail with the other two 
in both cases.

 I have a fix in the works and to have it integrated upstream I just need 
to accompany it with suitable cases -- like the fragment above -- for the 
GAS testsuite.  I'll send an update when it's ready.

  Maciej

Thread

{standard input}:136: Error: number (0x9000000080000000) larger than  32 bits kbuild test robot <fengguang.wu@intel.com> - 2016-04-17 02:30 +0200
  Re: {standard input}:136: Error: number (0x9000000080000000) larger  than 32 bits Ralf Baechle <ralf@linux-mips.org> - 2016-04-17 03:20 +0200
    Re: {standard input}:136: Error: number (0x9000000080000000) larger  than 32 bits "Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@linux-mips.org> - 2016-04-17 16:50 +0200
      Re: {standard input}:136: Error: number (0x9000000080000000) larger  than 32 bits Ralf Baechle <ralf@linux-mips.org> - 2016-04-18 15:40 +0200
        Re: {standard input}:136: Error: number (0x9000000080000000) larger  than 32 bits "Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@imgtec.com> - 2016-04-18 16:30 +0200
          Re: {standard input}:136: Error: number (0x9000000080000000) larger  than 32 bits Ralf Baechle <ralf@linux-mips.org> - 2016-04-18 18:00 +0200
            Re: {standard input}:136: Error: number (0x9000000080000000) larger  than 32 bits "Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@imgtec.com> - 2016-04-18 20:20 +0200
              Re: {standard input}:136: Error: number (0x9000000080000000) larger  than 32 bits "Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@imgtec.com> - 2016-04-19 02:30 +0200
                RE: {standard input}:136: Error: number (0x9000000080000000) larger  than 32 bits Matthew Fortune <Matthew.Fortune@imgtec.com> - 2016-04-19 16:50 +0200
                RE: {standard input}:136: Error: number (0x9000000080000000) larger  than 32 bits "Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@imgtec.com> - 2016-04-22 03:10 +0200

csiph-web