From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>
Cc: Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@kernel.org>,
Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>,
Michal Marek <michal.lkml@markovi.net>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux Kbuild mailing list <linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org>,
Sam Ravnborg <sam@ravnborg.org>, X86 ML <x86@kernel.org>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
Changbin Du <changbin.du@gmail.com>,
linux-toolchains@vger.kernel.org,
clang-built-linux <llvm@lists.linux.dev>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kbuild: Remove CONFIG_DEBUG_SECTION_MISMATCH
Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2022 22:32:28 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YlCb3L7ByWwszbaA@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAKwvOd=2xeZOg+0HosLPgCegKZxe7F-Cprw0MjOiWf2q=AbNDQ@mail.gmail.com>
On Fri, Apr 08, 2022 at 01:08:47PM -0700, Nick Desaulniers wrote:
> Lore thread start for newly cc'ed ML readers:
> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/7fad83ecde03540e65677959034315f8fbb3755e.1649434832.git.jpoimboe@redhat.com/
>
> On Fri, Apr 8, 2022 at 12:14 PM Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, Apr 09, 2022 at 03:29:21AM +0900, Masahiro Yamada wrote:
> > > Is [2] caused by dead code that was not optimized out
> > > due to the unusual inlining decisions by the compiler ?
> >
> > The complaint is due to SMAP validation; objtool will scream if there's
> > a CALL in between STAC/CLAC. The thinking is that since they open a
> > security window, we want tight code between them. We also very much
> > don't want tracing and other funnies to happen there. As such, any CALL
> > is dis-allowed.
>
> Just indirect calls, which might be manipulated, or static calls, too?
Any CALL instruction is a no-no. Only 'simple' code is allowed between
STAC and CLAC.
> > This weird option is having us upgrade quite a few 'inline' to
> > '__always_inline'.
>
> As is, the assumption that __init functions only call other __init
> functions or __always_inline is a brittle house of cards that leads to
> a "what color is your function" [0] scenario, and leads to code that
> happens to not emit warnings for compiler X (or compiler X version Y).
> There's also curious exceptions in modpost that look like memory leaks
> to me.
>
> We already have such toolchain portability issues for different
> toolchains and different configs; warnings from section mismatches,
> and objtool STAC/CLAC checks. I feel that Josh's patch would sweep
> more of those under the rug, so I'm not in favor of it, but could be
> convinced otherwise.
>
> TBH, I kind of think that we could use a C extension to permit
> __attribute__((always_inline)) to additionally be a statement
> attribute, rather than just a function attribute because of cases like
> this; we need the flexibility to make one call site __always_inline
> without necessarily forcing ALL callsites to be __always_inline'd.
>
> void y (void);
> void x (void) { __attribute__((always_inline)) y(); };
>
> (This is already expressable in LLVM IR; not (yet) in C. I'm not sure
> yet _why_ this was added to LLVM; whether a different language front
> end can express this, if C can and I'm mistaken, or whether it's only
> used for optimizations).
>
> I think that would give developers maximal flexibility to defer as
> much to the compiler's inlining decisions when they don't care, and
> express precisely what they need when they do [care].
>
> [0] https://journal.stuffwithstuff.com/2015/02/01/what-color-is-your-function/
So in the case of that latest __always_inline patch, there was only a
single caller. New syntax would buy us absolutely nothing there.
If we're talking extentions, I'd much rather have function spaces. That
is, being able to tag functions *AND* function pointers with an address
space qualifier.
I want to be able to create a function pointer that can only be assigned
functions from the noinstr space for example. Ideally calling such a
functino pointer would only be possible from within that space.
Anyway, let me go read that blog you linked.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-04-08 20:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <7fad83ecde03540e65677959034315f8fbb3755e.1649434832.git.jpoimboe@redhat.com>
[not found] ` <CAK7LNARvFcQgEB1b0L6giwx0vD7wU9L-OZ5jvm1c5+StLjeOYQ@mail.gmail.com>
[not found] ` <YlCJm8iQBPSOWIT5@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
2022-04-08 20:08 ` [PATCH] kbuild: Remove CONFIG_DEBUG_SECTION_MISMATCH Nick Desaulniers
2022-04-08 20:16 ` Nick Desaulniers
2022-04-08 20:32 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2022-04-08 20:48 ` Peter Zijlstra
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=YlCb3L7ByWwszbaA@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=changbin.du@gmail.com \
--cc=jpoimboe@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-toolchains@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=llvm@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=masahiroy@kernel.org \
--cc=michal.lkml@markovi.net \
--cc=ndesaulniers@google.com \
--cc=sam@ravnborg.org \
--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 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).