From: Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com>, Helge Deller <deller@gmx.de>,
Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>,
linux-alpha@vger.kernel.org,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
arcml <linux-snps-arc@lists.infradead.org>,
linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
linux-c6x-dev@linux-c6x.org,
"moderated list:H8/300 ARCHITECTURE"
<uclinux-h8-devel@lists.sourceforge.jp>,
linux-hexagon@vger.kernel.org,
"linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org" <linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux/m68k <linux-m68k@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-mips <linux-mips@linux-mips.org>,
"moderated list:NIOS2 ARCHITECTURE"
<nios2-dev@lists.rocketboards.org>,
openrisc@lists.librecores.org,
Parisc List <linux-parisc@vger.kernel.org>,
ppc-dev <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] treewide: remove current_text_addr
Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2018 17:43:43 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180827161121.07aa9da6@roar.ozlabs.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+55aFzuSCKfmgT9efHuwtan+m3+bPh4BpwbZwn5gGX_H=Thuw@mail.gmail.com>
[ Trimmed the cc list because my SMTP didn't accept that many
addresses. ]
On Sun, 26 Aug 2018 13:25:14 -0700
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 26, 2018 at 12:32 PM H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com> wrote:
> >
> > Here is a full-blown (user space) test program demonstrating the whole
> > technique and how to use it.
>
> So while I agree that some _THIS_IP_ users might be better off being
> converted to __builtin_return_address(0) at the caller, I also think
> that the whole "notailcall" thing shows why that can easily be more
> problematic than just our currnet _THIS_IP_ solution.
>
> Honestly, I'd suggest:
>
> - just do the current_text_addr() to _THIS_IP_ conversion
>
> - keep _THIS_IP_ and make it be the generic one, and screw the whole
> "some architectures might implement is better" issue. Nobody cares.
>
> - try to convince people to move away from the "we want the kernel
> instruction pointer for the call" model entirely, and consider this a
> "legacy" issue.
>
> The whole instruction pointer is a nasty thing. We should discourage
> it and not make complex infrastructure for it.
>
> Instead, maybe we could encourage something like
>
> struct kernel_loc { const char *file; const char *fn; int line; };
>
> #define __GEN_LOC__(n) \
> ({ static const struct kernel_loc n = { \
> __FILE__, __FUNCTION__, __LINE__ \
> }; &n; })
>
> #define _THIS_LOC_ __GEN_LOC__(__UNIQUE_ID(loc))
>
> which is a hell of a lot nicer to use, and actually allows gcc to
> optimize things (try it: if you pass a _THIS_LOC_ off to an inline
> function, and that inline function uses the name and line number, gcc
> will pick them up directly, without the extra structure dereference.
>
> Wouldn't it be much nicer to pass these kinds of "location pointer"
> around, rather than the nasty _THIS_IP_ thing?
Seems nice. Do you even need this unique ID thing? AFAIKS the name
would never really be useful.
It could perhaps go into a cold data section too, I assume the common
case is that you do not access it. Although gcc will end up putting
the file and function names into regular rodata.
Possibly we could add a printk specifier for it, pass it through to
existing BUG, etc macros that want exactly this, etc. Makes a lot of
sense.
Thanks,
Nick
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-08-27 7:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <CAKwvOdkWL_2yTnJqM6n6R9UCPwY4iz-9BQYGN2MDAk9EzumUvA@mail.gmail.com>
[not found] ` <20180821202900.208417-1-ndesaulniers@google.com>
[not found] ` <207784db-4fcc-85e7-a0b2-fec26b7dab81@gmx.de>
2018-08-26 2:38 ` [PATCH] treewide: remove current_text_addr H. Peter Anvin
2018-08-26 3:16 ` H. Peter Anvin
2018-08-26 4:56 ` H. Peter Anvin
2018-08-26 19:30 ` H. Peter Anvin
2018-08-26 20:25 ` Linus Torvalds
2018-08-27 2:52 ` Nick Desaulniers
2018-08-27 7:33 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-08-27 12:26 ` H. Peter Anvin
2018-08-27 13:11 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-08-27 13:33 ` H. Peter Anvin
2018-08-31 16:48 ` Nick Desaulniers
2018-08-27 7:43 ` Nicholas Piggin [this message]
2018-08-26 23:20 ` H. Peter Anvin
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=20180827161121.07aa9da6@roar.ozlabs.ibm.com \
--to=npiggin@gmail.com \
--cc=deller@gmx.de \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-alpha@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-c6x-dev@linux-c6x.org \
--cc=linux-hexagon@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-m68k@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mips@linux-mips.org \
--cc=linux-parisc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-snps-arc@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=ndesaulniers@google.com \
--cc=nios2-dev@lists.rocketboards.org \
--cc=openrisc@lists.librecores.org \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=uclinux-h8-devel@lists.sourceforge.jp \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).