All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Segher Boessenkool <segher@kernel.crashing.org>
To: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>
Cc: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@c-s.fr>,
	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>,
	Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] powerpc/irq: inline call_do_irq() and call_do_softirq()
Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2019 04:15:52 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20191121101552.GR16031@gate.crashing.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <877e3tbvsa.fsf@mpe.ellerman.id.au>

On Thu, Nov 21, 2019 at 05:14:45PM +1100, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@c-s.fr> writes:
> That breaks 64-bit with GCC9:
> 
>   arch/powerpc/kernel/irq.c: In function 'do_IRQ':
>   arch/powerpc/kernel/irq.c:650:2: error: PIC register clobbered by 'r2' in 'asm'
>     650 |  asm volatile(
>         |  ^~~
>   arch/powerpc/kernel/irq.c: In function 'do_softirq_own_stack':
>   arch/powerpc/kernel/irq.c:711:2: error: PIC register clobbered by 'r2' in 'asm'
>     711 |  asm volatile(
>         |  ^~~
> 
> 
> > diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kernel/irq.c b/arch/powerpc/kernel/irq.c
> > index 04204be49577..d62fe18405a0 100644
> > --- a/arch/powerpc/kernel/irq.c
> > +++ b/arch/powerpc/kernel/irq.c
> > @@ -642,6 +642,22 @@ void __do_irq(struct pt_regs *regs)
> >  	irq_exit();
> >  }
> >  
> > +static inline void call_do_irq(struct pt_regs *regs, void *sp)
> > +{
> > +	register unsigned long r3 asm("r3") = (unsigned long)regs;
> > +
> > +	/* Temporarily switch r1 to sp, call __do_irq() then restore r1 */
> > +	asm volatile(
> > +		"	"PPC_STLU"	1, %2(%1);\n"
> > +		"	mr		1, %1;\n"
> > +		"	bl		%3;\n"
> > +		"	"PPC_LL"	1, 0(1);\n" :
> > +		"+r"(r3) :
> > +		"b"(sp), "i"(THREAD_SIZE - STACK_FRAME_OVERHEAD), "i"(__do_irq) :
> > +		"lr", "xer", "ctr", "memory", "cr0", "cr1", "cr5", "cr6", "cr7",
> > +		"r0", "r2", "r4", "r5", "r6", "r7", "r8", "r9", "r10", "r11", "r12");
> > +}
> 
> If we add a nop after the bl, so the linker could insert a TOC restore,
> then I don't think there's any circumstance under which we expect this
> to actually clobber r2, is there?

That is mostly correct.

If call_do_irq was a no-inline function, there would not be problems.

What TOC does __do_irq require in r2 on entry, and what will be there
when it returns?


Segher

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Segher Boessenkool <segher@kernel.crashing.org>
To: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>
Cc: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] powerpc/irq: inline call_do_irq() and call_do_softirq()
Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2019 04:15:52 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20191121101552.GR16031@gate.crashing.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <877e3tbvsa.fsf@mpe.ellerman.id.au>

On Thu, Nov 21, 2019 at 05:14:45PM +1100, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@c-s.fr> writes:
> That breaks 64-bit with GCC9:
> 
>   arch/powerpc/kernel/irq.c: In function 'do_IRQ':
>   arch/powerpc/kernel/irq.c:650:2: error: PIC register clobbered by 'r2' in 'asm'
>     650 |  asm volatile(
>         |  ^~~
>   arch/powerpc/kernel/irq.c: In function 'do_softirq_own_stack':
>   arch/powerpc/kernel/irq.c:711:2: error: PIC register clobbered by 'r2' in 'asm'
>     711 |  asm volatile(
>         |  ^~~
> 
> 
> > diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kernel/irq.c b/arch/powerpc/kernel/irq.c
> > index 04204be49577..d62fe18405a0 100644
> > --- a/arch/powerpc/kernel/irq.c
> > +++ b/arch/powerpc/kernel/irq.c
> > @@ -642,6 +642,22 @@ void __do_irq(struct pt_regs *regs)
> >  	irq_exit();
> >  }
> >  
> > +static inline void call_do_irq(struct pt_regs *regs, void *sp)
> > +{
> > +	register unsigned long r3 asm("r3") = (unsigned long)regs;
> > +
> > +	/* Temporarily switch r1 to sp, call __do_irq() then restore r1 */
> > +	asm volatile(
> > +		"	"PPC_STLU"	1, %2(%1);\n"
> > +		"	mr		1, %1;\n"
> > +		"	bl		%3;\n"
> > +		"	"PPC_LL"	1, 0(1);\n" :
> > +		"+r"(r3) :
> > +		"b"(sp), "i"(THREAD_SIZE - STACK_FRAME_OVERHEAD), "i"(__do_irq) :
> > +		"lr", "xer", "ctr", "memory", "cr0", "cr1", "cr5", "cr6", "cr7",
> > +		"r0", "r2", "r4", "r5", "r6", "r7", "r8", "r9", "r10", "r11", "r12");
> > +}
> 
> If we add a nop after the bl, so the linker could insert a TOC restore,
> then I don't think there's any circumstance under which we expect this
> to actually clobber r2, is there?

That is mostly correct.

If call_do_irq was a no-inline function, there would not be problems.

What TOC does __do_irq require in r2 on entry, and what will be there
when it returns?


Segher

  reply	other threads:[~2019-11-21 10:16 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-10-10  5:36 [PATCH v4 1/2] powerpc/irq: bring back ksp_limit management in C functions Christophe Leroy
2019-10-10  5:36 ` Christophe Leroy
2019-10-10  5:36 ` [PATCH v4 2/2] powerpc/irq: inline call_do_irq() and call_do_softirq() Christophe Leroy
2019-10-10  5:36   ` Christophe Leroy
2019-11-21  6:14   ` Michael Ellerman
2019-11-21  6:14     ` Michael Ellerman
2019-11-21 10:15     ` Segher Boessenkool [this message]
2019-11-21 10:15       ` Segher Boessenkool
2019-11-25 10:32       ` Michael Ellerman
2019-11-25 10:32         ` Michael Ellerman
2019-11-25 14:25         ` Segher Boessenkool
2019-11-25 14:25           ` Segher Boessenkool
2019-11-27 13:50           ` Christophe Leroy
2019-11-27 13:50             ` Christophe Leroy
2019-11-27 14:59             ` Segher Boessenkool
2019-11-27 14:59               ` Segher Boessenkool
2019-11-27 15:15               ` Christophe Leroy
2019-11-27 15:15                 ` Christophe Leroy
2019-11-29 18:46                 ` Segher Boessenkool
2019-11-29 18:46                   ` Segher Boessenkool
2019-12-04  4:32                   ` Christophe Leroy
2019-12-04  4:32                     ` Christophe Leroy
2019-12-06 20:59                     ` Segher Boessenkool
2019-12-06 20:59                       ` Segher Boessenkool
2019-12-07  9:42                       ` Christophe Leroy
2019-12-07  9:42                         ` Christophe Leroy
2019-12-07 17:40                         ` Segher Boessenkool
2019-12-07 17:40                           ` Segher Boessenkool
2019-12-09 10:53                           ` Michael Ellerman
2019-12-09 10:53                             ` Michael Ellerman
2019-12-19  6:57                             ` Christophe Leroy
2019-12-19  6:57                               ` Christophe Leroy

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=20191121101552.GR16031@gate.crashing.org \
    --to=segher@kernel.crashing.org \
    --cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
    --cc=christophe.leroy@c-s.fr \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
    --cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
    --cc=paulus@samba.org \
    /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.