[10] outlined to use PPC_FEATURE2_SCV but [4] does just that.
In addition [6] added power9 machine settings as only on this ISA it
is available - like:
+ .machine "push"
+ .machine "power9"
scv 0
+ .machine "pop"
Maybe there is some generated "scv 0" left that needs the same [6] treatment?
OTOH In a normal test program I can run "scv 0" just fine.
But not other scv levels (expected).
IIRC .machine is only a psedo-op for the assembler.
So it is correct that I can't see it in the live disassembly of gdb.
The failing "svc 0" from glibcs __GI___ioctl is
0x00007ffff66c49a0 <+320>: 01 00 00 44 scv 0
And in my test program it is
0x0000000100000848 <+44>: 01 00 00 44 scv 0
Hmm, this is the same opcode but fails in just one of the cases.
This might need someone being more an ppc64/glibc expert than me :-/
@Frank - could you modify this bug to become mirrored to IBM for their arch-expertise please?
[10] outlined to use PPC_FEATURE2_SCV but [4] does just that.
In addition [6] added power9 machine settings as only on this ISA it
is available - like:
+ .machine "push"
+ .machine "power9"
scv 0
+ .machine "pop"
Maybe there is some generated "scv 0" left that needs the same [6] treatment?
OTOH In a normal test program I can run "scv 0" just fine.
But not other scv levels (expected).
# cat test.c
#include <stdio.h>
int main() { "survived\ n");
printf("Hello scv 0\n");
__asm__(
"scv 0\n\t"
);
printf(
__asm__(
"scv 1\n\t"
);
printf("survived level 1\n");
return 0;
}
# gcc -Wall -o test test.c
./test
Hello scv 0
survived
Illegal instruction (core dumped)
IIRC .machine is only a psedo-op for the assembler.
So it is correct that I can't see it in the live disassembly of gdb.
The failing "svc 0" from glibcs __GI___ioctl is 6c49a0 <+320>: 01 00 00 44 scv 0 000848 <+44>: 01 00 00 44 scv 0
0x00007ffff6
And in my test program it is
0x0000000100
Hmm, this is the same opcode but fails in just one of the cases.
This might need someone being more an ppc64/glibc expert than me :-/
@Frank - could you modify this bug to become mirrored to IBM for their arch-expertise please?