From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7E6BEC433DF for ; Thu, 9 Jul 2020 20:59:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [203.11.71.2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2184C2076A for ; Thu, 9 Jul 2020 20:59:45 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=efficios.com header.i=@efficios.com header.b="rMcZ8L2Q" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 2184C2076A Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=efficios.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Received: from bilbo.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [IPv6:2401:3900:2:1::3]) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4B2pTD2kZLzDr6X for ; Fri, 10 Jul 2020 06:59:44 +1000 (AEST) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=pass (sender SPF authorized) smtp.mailfrom=efficios.com (client-ip=167.114.26.124; helo=mail.efficios.com; envelope-from=compudj@efficios.com; receiver=) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=efficios.com Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=efficios.com header.i=@efficios.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=default header.b=rMcZ8L2Q; dkim-atps=neutral Received: from mail.efficios.com (mail.efficios.com [167.114.26.124]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4B2pR970FvzDqtZ for ; Fri, 10 Jul 2020 06:57:57 +1000 (AEST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.efficios.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 04DC02928C0; Thu, 9 Jul 2020 16:57:53 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mail.efficios.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail03.efficios.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10032) with ESMTP id WNUsV1GDHBRB; Thu, 9 Jul 2020 16:57:52 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.efficios.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B904C2928BF; Thu, 9 Jul 2020 16:57:52 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.10.3 mail.efficios.com B904C2928BF DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=efficios.com; s=default; t=1594328272; bh=j8L5xeGd9McORpcjaf5FdpAMBj3b4OCMGzV2SSpglJI=; h=Date:From:To:Message-ID:MIME-Version; b=rMcZ8L2QjwnTIXmJP50yPRHvLJ7FL3AnIh9zl37yK1drK7/EHeZS452ftliUGkrAZ gfcNy/wzlsZEbF1Mw1Euqa6Px2otnijfgQKK+AC8Miq3dPOJ/PBnlcf9d1bJfbPnOh 8nb7pmlYUlYlzF1B//vqXjgTMI7TIi8XbKw41sa6XCIfCHtrYPS87N/PSXvPX6zRpI hYqQJ+h9bIuBcsMYfzTMdVcf7U+h+8MqPo7UMjbanJpKvi0MZEKiwdJpsO3RHypMVP s4/6PhEZw4cLceTGum81zFkC9Eqb+b+1OKQg2rUeW5LEOHGD+m71y2PDP/B7OXtG12 61fVVipPaoH1A== X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at efficios.com Received: from mail.efficios.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail03.efficios.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id 8KRNKCQJERPK; Thu, 9 Jul 2020 16:57:52 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mail03.efficios.com (mail03.efficios.com [167.114.26.124]) by mail.efficios.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AF497292852; Thu, 9 Jul 2020 16:57:52 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 9 Jul 2020 16:57:52 -0400 (EDT) From: Mathieu Desnoyers To: Segher Boessenkool Message-ID: <285510163.7773.1594328272638.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com> In-Reply-To: <20200709204609.GQ3598@gate.crashing.org> References: <972420887.755.1594149430308.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com> <1968953502.5815.1594252883512.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com> <20200709001837.GD3598@gate.crashing.org> <1769596686.6365.1594302227962.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com> <20200709173712.GL3598@gate.crashing.org> <1584179170.7410.1594316576293.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com> <1682947575.7422.1594317379612.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com> <20200709204609.GQ3598@gate.crashing.org> Subject: Re: Failure to build librseq on ppc MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originating-IP: [167.114.26.124] X-Mailer: Zimbra 8.8.15_GA_3955 (ZimbraWebClient - FF78 (Linux)/8.8.15_GA_3953) Thread-Topic: Failure to build librseq on ppc Thread-Index: A3Re7gQDd7JxEOujPX5Z9ycuIkoKwg== X-BeenThere: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Boqun Feng , linuxppc-dev , Michael Jeanson Errors-To: linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Sender: "Linuxppc-dev" ----- On Jul 9, 2020, at 4:46 PM, Segher Boessenkool segher@kernel.crashing.org wrote: > On Thu, Jul 09, 2020 at 01:56:19PM -0400, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote: >> > Just to make sure I understand your recommendation. So rather than >> > hard coding r17 as the temporary registers, we could explicitly >> > declare the temporary register as a C variable, pass it as an >> > input operand to the inline asm, and then refer to it by operand >> > name in the macros using it. This way the compiler would be free >> > to perform its own register allocation. >> > >> > If that is what you have in mind, then yes, I think it makes a >> > lot of sense. >> >> Except that asm goto have this limitation with gcc: those cannot >> have any output operand, only inputs, clobbers and target labels. >> We cannot modify a temporary register received as input operand. So I don't >> see how to get a temporary register allocated by the compiler considering >> this limitation. > > Heh, yet another reason not to obfuscate your inline asm: it didn't > register this is asm goto. > > A clobber is one way, yes (those *are* allowed in asm goto). Another > way is to not actually change that register: move the original value > back into there at the end of the asm! (That isn't always easy to do, > it depends on your code). So something like > > long start = ...; > long tmp = start; > asm("stuff that modifies %0; ...; mr %0,%1" : : "r"(tmp), "r"(start)); > > is just fine: %0 isn't actually modified at all, as far as GCC is > concerned, and this isn't lying to it! It appears to be at the cost of adding one extra instruction on the fast-path to restore the register to its original value. I'll leave Boqun whom authored the original rseq-ppc code to figure out what works best performance-wise (when he finds time). Thanks for the pointers! Mathieu -- Mathieu Desnoyers EfficiOS Inc. http://www.efficios.com