xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: SGI XFS on ppc

To: linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: SGI XFS on ppc
From: Thomas Graichen <news-innominate.list.sgi.xfs@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: 3 Aug 2000 14:23:17 GMT
Distribution: local
Organization: innominate AG, Berlin, Germany
References: <news-innominate.list.sgi.xfs@innominate.de> <200008031342.IAA31394@jen.americas.sgi.com>
Reply-to: Thomas Graichen <graichen@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-to: thomas.graichen@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sender: owner-linux-xfs-announce@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: tin/1.4.2-20000205 ("Possession") (UNIX) (Linux/2.2.16-local (i586))
Steve Lord <lord@xxxxxxx> wrote:

> This is a bit of a shock in the dark, but here goes.....

> there are two things you can try:

> 1. in xfs_bit.c try undefining _MIPS_SIM after the header file includes.
> ...
> 2. in xfs_xlatesb try changing this statement at the end of the function:
> ...
>    Here a 64 bit mask value is being generated - it may also be something
>    the compiler has issues with. A simple user space test would be this
>
>    unsigned int i;
>
>    for (i = 0; i < 64; i++) {
>       printf("Mask %d is 0x%llx", ~(1LL << i));
>    }
>
>    If the compiler was truncating the mask to be 32 bits the behavior you
>    are seeing could be explained.

here is the result of the userland thing:

Mask 1 is 0xfffffffffffffffe
Mask 2 is 0xfffffffffffffffd
Mask 4 is 0xfffffffffffffffb
Mask 8 is 0xfffffffffffffff7
Mask 16 is 0xffffffffffffffef
Mask 32 is 0xffffffffffffffdf
Mask 64 is 0xffffffffffffffbf
Mask 128 is 0xffffffffffffff7f
Mask 256 is 0xfffffffffffffeff
Mask 512 is 0xfffffffffffffdff
Mask 1024 is 0xfffffffffffffbff
Mask 2048 is 0xfffffffffffff7ff
Mask 4096 is 0xffffffffffffefff
Mask 8192 is 0xffffffffffffdfff
Mask 16384 is 0xffffffffffffbfff
Mask 32768 is 0xffffffffffff7fff
Mask 65536 is 0xfffffffffffeffff
Mask 131072 is 0xfffffffffffdffff
Mask 262144 is 0xfffffffffffbffff
Mask 524288 is 0xfffffffffff7ffff
Mask 1048576 is 0xffffffffffefffff
Mask 2097152 is 0xffffffffffdfffff
Mask 4194304 is 0xffffffffffbfffff
Mask 8388608 is 0xffffffffff7fffff
Mask 16777216 is 0xfffffffffeffffff
Mask 33554432 is 0xfffffffffdffffff
Mask 67108864 is 0xfffffffffbffffff
Mask 134217728 is 0xfffffffff7ffffff
Mask 268435456 is 0xffffffffefffffff
Mask 536870912 is 0xffffffffdfffffff
Mask 1073741824 is 0xffffffffbfffffff
Mask -2147483648 is 0xffffffff7fffffff
Mask 0 is 0xfffffffeffffffff
Mask 0 is 0xfffffffdffffffff
Mask 0 is 0xfffffffbffffffff
Mask 0 is 0xfffffff7ffffffff
Mask 0 is 0xffffffefffffffff
Mask 0 is 0xffffffdfffffffff
Mask 0 is 0xffffffbfffffffff
Mask 0 is 0xffffff7fffffffff
Mask 0 is 0xfffffeffffffffff
Mask 0 is 0xfffffdffffffffff
Mask 0 is 0xfffffbffffffffff
Mask 0 is 0xfffff7ffffffffff
Mask 0 is 0xffffefffffffffff
Mask 0 is 0xffffdfffffffffff
Mask 0 is 0xffffbfffffffffff
Mask 0 is 0xffff7fffffffffff
Mask 0 is 0xfffeffffffffffff
Mask 0 is 0xfffdffffffffffff
Mask 0 is 0xfffbffffffffffff
Mask 0 is 0xfff7ffffffffffff
Mask 0 is 0xffefffffffffffff
Mask 0 is 0xffdfffffffffffff
Mask 0 is 0xffbfffffffffffff
Mask 0 is 0xff7fffffffffffff
Mask 0 is 0xfeffffffffffffff
Mask 0 is 0xfdffffffffffffff
Mask 0 is 0xfbffffffffffffff
Mask 0 is 0xf7ffffffffffffff
Mask 0 is 0xefffffffffffffff
Mask 0 is 0xdfffffffffffffff
Mask 0 is 0xbfffffffffffffff
Mask 0 is 0x7fffffffffffffff

which looks like what you said above - but also a (long long)i does
not change the behavior here ... results for 1. and 2. above will
come soon

t

-- 
thomas.graichen@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Technical Director                                       innominate AG
Clustering & Security                                networking people
tel: +49.30.308806-13 fax: -77               web: http://innominate.de

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>