Pure LFS - e2fs trouble

Jules Bjørn Colding JuBColding at yorkref.com
Mon Feb 17 12:55:48 PST 2003


Thanks. 

I am consistently compiling with -march=i486 in ch 6 so that I can move
the resulting lfs build onto my target. Do you know if the presence of
rdtsc in the e2fsck binaries is due to glibc or gcc ?

-- 
  jules


On Mon, 2003-02-17 at 21:46, Adam Trilling wrote:
> rdtsc is an instruction that reads a counter which keeps track of the
> number of elapsed clock cycles since the system was booted.
> 
> there's a macro in /usr/include/asm/msr.h called rdtsc which takes
> an unsigned long and a long as args, and packes the number of cycles into
> the args.
> 
> try compiling and running the following program:
> 
> ------- BEGIN testrdtsc.c -----------
> 
> #include <stdio.h>
> #include <asm/msr.h>
> 
> int main() {
> 
>   unsigned long low;
>   long high;
>   long long total;
> 
>   rdtsc(low, high);
> 
>   total = high;
>   total <<= 32;
>   total |= low;
> 
>   printf("number of cycles = %lld\n", total);
> 
>   return 0;
> }
> 
> --------- END testrdtsc.c -----------
> 
> This will tell you if there's a problem specifically with rdtsc, or some
> bigger problem with your CPU or your glibc.
> 
> I've got no idea what is actually happening here, but rdtsc is cool :)
> 
> adam
> 
> On Mon, 17 Feb 2003, Jules Bjørn Colding wrote:
> 
> > Well, I have tried to debug the problem using gdbserver. e2fsck receives
> > SIGILL at an assembler instruction called  rdtsc. Gdb reports that the
> > final instruction was:
> >
> >   0x807d1b7 <non_dynamic_init+7>:	rdtsc
> >
> > Gdb said that there was no source file for the non_dynamic_init()
> > function, so I assume that it comes from glibc. I have no idea what to
> > do with this information. Do anybody have a clue?
> >
> >
> > Thanks,
> > jules
> >
> >
> > On Mon, 2003-02-17 at 19:05, Jules Bjørn Colding wrote:
> > > Yes they are. But I am using 2.2.5 (ch 5+6) all over the line. Is the
> > > solution to upgrade ?
> > >
> > > --
> > >   jules
> > >
> > > On Mon, 2003-02-17 at 18:59, Justin Hibbits wrote:
> > > > > Any clues ?
> > > >
> > > > Are they statically linked against glibc 2.2.5?  I know there was a problem
> > > > with the NLS stuff and other library stuff when switching from 2.2.5 to 2.3.1.
> > > >
> > > > -Justin
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Unsubscribe: send email to listar at linuxfromscratch.org
> > > and put 'unsubscribe lfs-dev' in the subject header of the message
> > >
> > --
> >   jules
> >
> > --
> > Unsubscribe: send email to listar at linuxfromscratch.org
> > and put 'unsubscribe lfs-dev' in the subject header of the message
> >
> >
> 
> 
> Adam Trilling
> agt10 at columbia.edu
> -- 
> Unsubscribe: send email to listar at linuxfromscratch.org
> and put 'unsubscribe lfs-dev' in the subject header of the message
> 
-- 
  jules

-- 
Unsubscribe: send email to listar at linuxfromscratch.org
and put 'unsubscribe lfs-dev' in the subject header of the message



More information about the lfs-dev mailing list