All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@intel.com>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: David Laight <David.Laight@ACULAB.COM>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
	H Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com>,
	Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
	Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>,
	Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@intel.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Ravi V Shankar <ravi.v.shankar@intel.com>,
	Xiaoyao Li <xiaoyao.li@intel.com>,
	Christopherson Sean J <sean.j.christopherson@intel.com>,
	Kalle Valo <kvalo@codeaurora.org>,
	Michael Chan <michael.chan@broadcom.com>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, x86 <x86@kernel.org>,
	"kvm@vger.kernel.org" <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
	"netdev@vger.kernel.org" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org" <linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 13/15] x86/split_lock: Enable split lock detection by default
Date: Tue, 7 May 2019 13:48:12 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190507204812.GC124959@romley-ivt3.sc.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.21.1904251255590.1960@nanos.tec.linutronix.de>

On Thu, Apr 25, 2019 at 12:58:32PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Thu, 25 Apr 2019, David Laight wrote:
> 
> > From:  Fenghua Yu
> > > Sent: 24 April 2019 20:33
> > > A split locked access locks bus and degrades overall memory access
> > > performance. When split lock detection feature is enumerated, enable
> > > the feature by default by writing 1 to bit 29 in MSR TEST_CTL to find
> > > any split lock issue.
> > 
> > You can't enable this by default until ALL the known potentially
> > misaligned locked memory operations have been fixed.
> 
> Errm? The result will be a WARN_ON() printed and no further damage. It's
> not making anything worse than it is now. In fact we just should add a
> 
>     WARN_ON_ONCE(!aligned_to_long(p)) to all the xxx_bit() operations.
> 
> so we catch them even when they do not trigger that #AC thingy.

I add WARN_ON_ONCE() in atomic xxx_bit(). But the code cannot be compiled.

Here is a simplified patch (only adding warning in set_bit()):

diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/bitops.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/bitops.h
index 8e790ec219a5..bc889ac12e26 100644
--- a/arch/x86/include/asm/bitops.h
+++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/bitops.h
@@ -14,6 +14,8 @@
 #endif

 #include <linux/compiler.h>
+#include <linux/kernel.h>
+#include <asm-generic/bug.h>
 #include <asm/alternative.h>
 #include <asm/rmwcc.h>
 #include <asm/barrier.h>
@@ -67,6 +69,8 @@
 static __always_inline void
 set_bit(long nr, volatile unsigned long *addr)
 {
+       WARN_ON_ONCE(!IS_ALIGNED((unsigned long)addr, sizeof(unsigned long)));
+
        if (IS_IMMEDIATE(nr)) {
                asm volatile(LOCK_PREFIX "orb %1,%0"
                        : CONST_MASK_ADDR(nr, addr)

gcc reports errors:
  CC      kernel/bounds.s
  CALL    scripts/atomic/check-atomics.sh
In file included from ./include/linux/bitops.h:19,
                 from ./include/linux/kernel.h:12,
                 from ./include/asm-generic/bug.h:18,
                 from ./arch/x86/include/asm/bug.h:83,
                 from ./include/linux/bug.h:5,
                 from ./include/linux/page-flags.h:10,
                 from kernel/bounds.c:10:
./arch/x86/include/asm/bitops.h: In function ‘set_bit’:
./arch/x86/include/asm/bitops.h:72:2: error: implicit declaration of function ‘WARN_ON_ONCE’; did you mean ‘WRITE_ONCE’? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
  WARN_ON_ONCE(!IS_ALIGNED((unsigned long)addr, sizeof(unsigned long)));
  ^~~~~~~~~~~~
./arch/x86/include/asm/bitops.h:72:16: error: implicit declaration of function ‘IS_ALIGNED’; did you mean ‘IS_ENABLED’? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
  WARN_ON_ONCE(!IS_ALIGNED((unsigned long)addr, sizeof(unsigned long)));
                ^~~~~~~~~~
I think it's because arch/x86/include/asm/bitops.h is included in
include/linux/kernel.h before IS_ALIGNED() is defined and in
include/asm-generic/bug.h before WARN_ON_ONCE() is defined.

How to write a right warn patch and solve the compilation issue?

Thanks.

-Fenghua

  parent reply	other threads:[~2019-05-07 20:56 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 45+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-04-24 19:32 [PATCH v8 00/15] x86/split_lock: Enable split lock detection Fenghua Yu
2019-04-24 19:32 ` [PATCH v8 01/15] x86/common: Align cpu_caps_cleared and cpu_caps_set to unsigned long Fenghua Yu
2019-04-24 19:32 ` [PATCH v8 02/15] drivers/net/b44: Align pwol_mask to unsigned long for better performance Fenghua Yu
2019-04-24 19:32 ` [PATCH v8 03/15] wlcore: simplify/fix/optimize reg_ch_conf_pending operations Fenghua Yu
2019-04-25 17:12   ` Kalle Valo
2019-04-24 19:32 ` [PATCH v8 04/15] x86/split_lock: Align x86_capability to unsigned long to avoid split locked access Fenghua Yu
2019-04-24 19:32 ` [PATCH v8 05/15] x86/msr-index: Define MSR_IA32_CORE_CAPABILITY and split lock detection bit Fenghua Yu
2019-04-25  5:45   ` Ingo Molnar
2019-04-25 19:01     ` Fenghua Yu
2019-04-25 19:47       ` Ingo Molnar
2019-04-25 19:51         ` Fenghua Yu
2019-04-25 20:08           ` Ingo Molnar
2019-04-25 20:22             ` Fenghua Yu
2019-04-26  6:00               ` Ingo Molnar
2019-05-06  0:12                 ` Fenghua Yu
2019-04-24 19:32 ` [PATCH v8 06/15] x86/cpufeatures: Enumerate MSR_IA32_CORE_CAPABILITY Fenghua Yu
2019-04-24 19:32 ` [PATCH v8 07/15] x86/split_lock: Enumerate split lock detection by MSR_IA32_CORE_CAPABILITY Fenghua Yu
2019-04-24 19:32 ` [PATCH v8 08/15] x86/split_lock: Enumerate split lock detection on Icelake mobile processor Fenghua Yu
2019-04-24 19:32 ` [PATCH v8 09/15] x86/split_lock: Define MSR TEST_CTL register Fenghua Yu
2019-04-25  6:21   ` Ingo Molnar
2019-04-25 19:48     ` Fenghua Yu
2019-04-24 19:32 ` [PATCH v8 10/15] x86/split_lock: Handle #AC exception for split lock Fenghua Yu
2019-04-25  6:07   ` Ingo Molnar
2019-04-25  7:29   ` Thomas Gleixner
2019-04-24 19:32 ` [PATCH v8 11/15] kvm/x86: Emulate MSR IA32_CORE_CAPABILITY Fenghua Yu
2019-04-24 19:32 ` [PATCH v8 12/15] kvm/vmx: Emulate MSR TEST_CTL Fenghua Yu
2019-04-25  7:42   ` Thomas Gleixner
2019-04-27 12:20     ` Xiaoyao Li
2019-04-28  7:09       ` Thomas Gleixner
2019-04-28  7:34         ` Xiaoyao Li
2019-04-29  7:31           ` Thomas Gleixner
2019-04-29  5:21         ` Xiaoyao Li
2019-04-24 19:33 ` [PATCH v8 13/15] x86/split_lock: Enable split lock detection by default Fenghua Yu
2019-04-25  7:50   ` Thomas Gleixner
2019-05-06 21:39     ` Fenghua Yu
2019-04-25 10:52   ` David Laight
2019-04-25 10:58     ` Thomas Gleixner
2019-04-25 11:13       ` David Laight
2019-04-25 11:41         ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-04-25 13:04         ` Thomas Gleixner
2019-05-07 20:48       ` Fenghua Yu [this message]
2019-04-24 19:33 ` [PATCH v8 14/15] x86/split_lock: Disable split lock detection by kernel parameter "nosplit_lock_detect" Fenghua Yu
2019-04-24 19:33 ` [PATCH v8 15/15] x86/split_lock: Add a sysfs interface to enable/disable split lock detection during run time Fenghua Yu
2019-04-25  6:31   ` Ingo Molnar
2019-05-06  0:21     ` Fenghua Yu

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20190507204812.GC124959@romley-ivt3.sc.intel.com \
    --to=fenghua.yu@intel.com \
    --cc=David.Laight@ACULAB.COM \
    --cc=ashok.raj@intel.com \
    --cc=bp@alien8.de \
    --cc=dave.hansen@intel.com \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=kvalo@codeaurora.org \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=michael.chan@broadcom.com \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=ravi.v.shankar@intel.com \
    --cc=sean.j.christopherson@intel.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=x86@kernel.org \
    --cc=xiaoyao.li@intel.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.