From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S1751162AbdFAN5s (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Thu, 1 Jun 2017 09:57:48 -0400
Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:36280 "EHLO mail.kernel.org"
        rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
        id S1751058AbdFAN5q (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Thu, 1 Jun 2017 09:57:46 -0400
DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 6FCA623A10
Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=kernel.org
Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=luto@kernel.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <5ec63cefd2093152464b7bb1383938f6970e65eb.1496293620.git.jpoimboe@redhat.com>
References: <cover.1496293620.git.jpoimboe@redhat.com> <5ec63cefd2093152464b7bb1383938f6970e65eb.1496293620.git.jpoimboe@redhat.com>
From: Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>
Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2017 06:57:24 -0700
X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: <CALCETrXsLqsqYWFcjQBw-F_booEAfLKhG+EEZtBfrDcntEgjvg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CALCETrXsLqsqYWFcjQBw-F_booEAfLKhG+EEZtBfrDcntEgjvg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 05/10] objtool, x86: add facility for asm code to
 provide CFI hints
To: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>
Cc: X86 ML <x86@kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        live-patching@vger.kernel.org,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>, Jiri Slaby <jslaby@suse.cz>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 10:44 PM, Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com> wrote:
> Some asm (and inline asm) code does special things to the stack which
> objtool can't understand.  (Nor can GCC or GNU assembler, for that
> matter.)  In such cases we need a facility for the code to provide
> annotations, so the unwinder can unwind through it.
>
> This provides such a facility, in the form of CFI hints.  They're
> similar to the GNU assembler .cfi* directives, but they give more
> information, and are needed in far fewer places, because objtool can
> fill in the blanks by following branches and adjusting the stack pointer
> for pushes and pops.

Two minor suggestions:

Could you prefix these with something other than "CFI_"?  For those of
use who have read the binutils manual, using "CFI_" sounds awfully
like .cfi_, and people might expect the semantics to be the same.

> +#define CFI_HINT(cfa_reg, cfa_offset, type)                    \
> +       "999: \n\t"                                             \

Have you checked if 999 is used elsewhere?  My personal preference is to use:

.Ldescriptive_text_\@:

instead of a hopefully-unique number.  I never researched the history,
but I suspect that the convention of using large numbers came from
early binutils versions that didn't have \@, but we use \@ fairly
extensively in the kernel these days, so it would seem that we no
longer support binutils versions that old.