All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Rasmus Villemoes <linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Jason Baron <jbaron@akamai.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, x86@kernel.org,
	Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>,
	Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
	Nathan Chancellor <natechancellor@gmail.com>,
	Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
	Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/10] implement DYNAMIC_DEBUG_RELATIVE_POINTERS
Date: Mon, 6 May 2019 09:34:55 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <25dfde77-fdad-0b99-75ec-4ba480058970@rasmusvillemoes.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190506070544.GA66463@gmail.com>

On 06/05/2019 09.05, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> 
> 
> It's sad to see such nice data footprint savings go the way of the dodo 
> just because GCC 4.8 is buggy.
> 
> The current compatibility cut-off is GCC 4.6:
> 
>   GNU C                  4.6              gcc --version
> 
> Do we know where the GCC bug was fixed, was it in GCC 4.9?

Not sure. The report was from a build on CentOS with gcc 4.8.5, so I
tried installing the gcc-4.8 package on my Ubuntu machine and could
reproduce. Then I tried installed gcc-4.9, and after disabling
CONFIG_RETPOLINE (both CentOS and Ubuntu carry backported retpoline
support in their 4.8, but apparently not 4.9), I could see that the
problem was gone. But whether it's gone because it no longer elides an
asm volatile() on a code path it otherwise emits code for, or because it
simply doesn't emit the unused static inline() at all I don't know.

I thought 0day also tested a range of supported compiler versions, so I
was rather surprised at getting this report at all. But I suppose the
arch/config matrix is already pretty huge. Anyway, the bug certainly
doesn't exist in any of the gcc versions 0day does test.

I _am_ bending the C rules a bit with the "extern some_var; asm
volatile(".section some_section\nsome_var: blabla");". I should probably
ask on the gcc list whether this way of defining a local symbol in
inline assembly and referring to it from C is supposed to work, or it
just happens to work by chance.

Rasmus

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Rasmus Villemoes <linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Cc: Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
	x86@kernel.org, Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
	Jason Baron <jbaron@akamai.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
	Nathan Chancellor <natechancellor@gmail.com>,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/10] implement DYNAMIC_DEBUG_RELATIVE_POINTERS
Date: Mon, 6 May 2019 09:34:55 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <25dfde77-fdad-0b99-75ec-4ba480058970@rasmusvillemoes.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190506070544.GA66463@gmail.com>

On 06/05/2019 09.05, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> 
> 
> It's sad to see such nice data footprint savings go the way of the dodo 
> just because GCC 4.8 is buggy.
> 
> The current compatibility cut-off is GCC 4.6:
> 
>   GNU C                  4.6              gcc --version
> 
> Do we know where the GCC bug was fixed, was it in GCC 4.9?

Not sure. The report was from a build on CentOS with gcc 4.8.5, so I
tried installing the gcc-4.8 package on my Ubuntu machine and could
reproduce. Then I tried installed gcc-4.9, and after disabling
CONFIG_RETPOLINE (both CentOS and Ubuntu carry backported retpoline
support in their 4.8, but apparently not 4.9), I could see that the
problem was gone. But whether it's gone because it no longer elides an
asm volatile() on a code path it otherwise emits code for, or because it
simply doesn't emit the unused static inline() at all I don't know.

I thought 0day also tested a range of supported compiler versions, so I
was rather surprised at getting this report at all. But I suppose the
arch/config matrix is already pretty huge. Anyway, the bug certainly
doesn't exist in any of the gcc versions 0day does test.

I _am_ bending the C rules a bit with the "extern some_var; asm
volatile(".section some_section\nsome_var: blabla");". I should probably
ask on the gcc list whether this way of defining a local symbol in
inline assembly and referring to it from C is supposed to work, or it
just happens to work by chance.

Rasmus

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Rasmus Villemoes <linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Cc: Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
	Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>,
	x86@kernel.org, Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
	Jason Baron <jbaron@akamai.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
	Nathan Chancellor <natechancellor@gmail.com>,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/10] implement DYNAMIC_DEBUG_RELATIVE_POINTERS
Date: Mon, 6 May 2019 09:34:55 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <25dfde77-fdad-0b99-75ec-4ba480058970@rasmusvillemoes.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190506070544.GA66463@gmail.com>

On 06/05/2019 09.05, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> 
> 
> It's sad to see such nice data footprint savings go the way of the dodo 
> just because GCC 4.8 is buggy.
> 
> The current compatibility cut-off is GCC 4.6:
> 
>   GNU C                  4.6              gcc --version
> 
> Do we know where the GCC bug was fixed, was it in GCC 4.9?

Not sure. The report was from a build on CentOS with gcc 4.8.5, so I
tried installing the gcc-4.8 package on my Ubuntu machine and could
reproduce. Then I tried installed gcc-4.9, and after disabling
CONFIG_RETPOLINE (both CentOS and Ubuntu carry backported retpoline
support in their 4.8, but apparently not 4.9), I could see that the
problem was gone. But whether it's gone because it no longer elides an
asm volatile() on a code path it otherwise emits code for, or because it
simply doesn't emit the unused static inline() at all I don't know.

I thought 0day also tested a range of supported compiler versions, so I
was rather surprised at getting this report at all. But I suppose the
arch/config matrix is already pretty huge. Anyway, the bug certainly
doesn't exist in any of the gcc versions 0day does test.

I _am_ bending the C rules a bit with the "extern some_var; asm
volatile(".section some_section\nsome_var: blabla");". I should probably
ask on the gcc list whether this way of defining a local symbol in
inline assembly and referring to it from C is supposed to work, or it
just happens to work by chance.

Rasmus

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

  reply	other threads:[~2019-05-06  7:35 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 62+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-04-09 21:25 [PATCH 00/10] implement DYNAMIC_DEBUG_RELATIVE_POINTERS Rasmus Villemoes
2019-04-09 21:25 ` Rasmus Villemoes
2019-04-09 21:25 ` Rasmus Villemoes
2019-04-09 21:25 ` [PATCH 01/10] linux/device.h: use unique identifier for each struct _ddebug Rasmus Villemoes
2019-04-09 21:25 ` [PATCH 02/10] linux/net.h: " Rasmus Villemoes
2019-04-09 21:25 ` [PATCH 03/10] linux/printk.h: " Rasmus Villemoes
2019-04-09 21:25 ` [PATCH 04/10] dynamic_debug: introduce accessors for string members of " Rasmus Villemoes
2019-04-09 21:25 ` [PATCH 05/10] dynamic_debug: drop use of bitfields in " Rasmus Villemoes
2019-04-09 21:25 ` [PATCH 06/10] dynamic_debug: introduce CONFIG_DYNAMIC_DEBUG_RELATIVE_POINTERS Rasmus Villemoes
2019-04-09 21:25 ` [PATCH 07/10] dynamic_debug: add asm-generic implementation for DYNAMIC_DEBUG_RELATIVE_POINTERS Rasmus Villemoes
2019-04-09 21:25   ` Rasmus Villemoes
2019-04-09 21:25   ` Rasmus Villemoes
2019-04-09 21:25 ` [PATCH 08/10] x86-64: select DYNAMIC_DEBUG_RELATIVE_POINTERS Rasmus Villemoes
2019-04-10  7:31   ` Ingo Molnar
2019-04-09 21:25 ` [PATCH 09/10] arm64: " Rasmus Villemoes
2019-04-09 21:25   ` Rasmus Villemoes
2019-04-26  9:39   ` Arnd Bergmann
2019-04-26  9:39     ` Arnd Bergmann
2019-04-26 10:05     ` Rasmus Villemoes
2019-04-26 10:05       ` Rasmus Villemoes
2019-04-26 13:00       ` Nathan Chancellor
2019-04-26 13:00         ` Nathan Chancellor
2019-04-26 19:06         ` [PATCH 11/10] arm64: unbreak DYNAMIC_DEBUG=y build with clang Rasmus Villemoes
2019-04-26 19:06           ` Rasmus Villemoes
2019-04-26 19:06           ` [PATCH 12/10] powerpc: " Rasmus Villemoes
2019-04-26 19:06             ` Rasmus Villemoes
2019-04-29 17:34             ` Nick Desaulniers
2019-04-29 17:34               ` Nick Desaulniers
2019-04-26 19:27           ` [PATCH 11/10] arm64: " Rasmus Villemoes
2019-04-26 19:27             ` Rasmus Villemoes
2019-04-26 21:58             ` Konstantin Ryabitsev
2019-04-26 21:58               ` Konstantin Ryabitsev
2019-04-26 22:07             ` Konstantin Ryabitsev
2019-04-26 22:07               ` Konstantin Ryabitsev
2019-04-29 17:32           ` Nick Desaulniers
2019-04-29 17:32             ` Nick Desaulniers
2019-04-30 18:22             ` Nick Desaulniers
2019-04-30 18:22               ` Nick Desaulniers
2019-05-02  8:57               ` Rasmus Villemoes
2019-05-02  8:57                 ` Rasmus Villemoes
2019-04-09 21:25 ` [PATCH 10/10] powerpc: select DYNAMIC_DEBUG_RELATIVE_POINTERS for PPC64 Rasmus Villemoes
2019-04-09 21:25   ` Rasmus Villemoes
2019-04-23 15:37   ` Christophe Leroy
2019-04-23 19:36     ` Andrew Morton
2019-04-23 19:36       ` Andrew Morton
2019-04-24  6:46       ` Rasmus Villemoes
2019-04-24  6:46         ` Rasmus Villemoes
2019-05-06  6:48 ` [PATCH 00/10] implement DYNAMIC_DEBUG_RELATIVE_POINTERS Rasmus Villemoes
2019-05-06  6:48   ` Rasmus Villemoes
2019-05-06  6:48   ` Rasmus Villemoes
2019-05-06  7:05   ` Ingo Molnar
2019-05-06  7:05     ` Ingo Molnar
2019-05-06  7:05     ` Ingo Molnar
2019-05-06  7:34     ` Rasmus Villemoes [this message]
2019-05-06  7:34       ` Rasmus Villemoes
2019-05-06  7:34       ` Rasmus Villemoes
2019-05-06  7:48       ` Ingo Molnar
2019-05-06  7:48         ` Ingo Molnar
2019-05-06  7:48         ` Ingo Molnar
2019-05-06 14:48       ` Segher Boessenkool
2019-05-06 14:48         ` Segher Boessenkool
2019-05-06 14:48         ` Segher Boessenkool

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=25dfde77-fdad-0b99-75ec-4ba480058970@rasmusvillemoes.dk \
    --to=linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=arnd@arndb.de \
    --cc=jbaron@akamai.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
    --cc=luto@kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
    --cc=natechancellor@gmail.com \
    --cc=ndesaulniers@google.com \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=will.deacon@arm.com \
    --cc=x86@kernel.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.