Re: [RFC][PATCH 07/22] x86,extable: Extend extable functionality

From: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	mark.rutland@arm.com, dvyukov@google.com, seanjc@google.com,
	pbonzini@redhat.com, mbenes@suse.cz
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 07/22] x86,extable: Extend extable functionality
Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2021 14:49:35 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20211104214935.xl54xlr3snwmtyna@treble> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20211104165524.925401847@infradead.org>

On Thu, Nov 04, 2021 at 05:47:36PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> +asm(
> +"	.macro extable_type_reg type:req reg:req\n"
> +"	.set regnr, 0\n"
> +"	.irp rs,rax,rcx,rdx,rbx,rsp,rbp,rsi,rdi,r8,r9,r10,r11,r12,r13,r14,r15\n"
> +"	.ifc \\reg, %\\rs\n"
> +"	.long \\type + (regnr << 8)\n"
> +"	.endif\n"
> +"	.set regnr, regnr+1\n"
> +"	.endr\n"
> +"	.set regnr, 0\n"
> +"	.irp rs,eax,ecx,edx,ebx,esp,ebp,esi,edi,r8d,r9d,r10d,r11d,r12d,r13d,r14d,r15d\n"
> +"	.ifc \\reg, %\\rs\n"
> +"	.long \\type + (regnr << 8)\n"
> +"	.endif\n"
> +"	.set regnr, regnr+1\n"
> +"	.endr\n"
> +"	.endm\n"
> +);

How about some error checking to detect a typo, or a forgotten '%':

diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/asm.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/asm.h
index 5d0ff8c60983..95bb23082b87 100644
--- a/arch/x86/include/asm/asm.h
+++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/asm.h
@@ -154,9 +154,11 @@
 
 asm(
 "	.macro extable_type_reg type:req reg:req\n"
+"	.set found, 0\n"
 "	.set regnr, 0\n"
 "	.irp rs,rax,rcx,rdx,rbx,rsp,rbp,rsi,rdi,r8,r9,r10,r11,r12,r13,r14,r15\n"
 "	.ifc \\reg, %\\rs\n"
+"	.set found, found+1\n"
 "	.long \\type + (regnr << 8)\n"
 "	.endif\n"
 "	.set regnr, regnr+1\n"
@@ -164,10 +166,14 @@ asm(
 "	.set regnr, 0\n"
 "	.irp rs,eax,ecx,edx,ebx,esp,ebp,esi,edi,r8d,r9d,r10d,r11d,r12d,r13d,r14d,r15d\n"
 "	.ifc \\reg, %\\rs\n"
+"	.set found, found+1\n"
 "	.long \\type + (regnr << 8)\n"
 "	.endif\n"
 "	.set regnr, regnr+1\n"
 "	.endr\n"
+"	.if (found != 1)\n"
+"	.error \"extable_type_reg: bad register argument\"\n"
+"	.endif\n"
 "	.endm\n"
 );
 
> +#define EX_FLAG_CLR_AX			EX_TYPE_FLAG(1)
> +#define EX_FLAG_CLR_DX			EX_TYPE_FLAG(2)
> +#define EX_FLAG_CLR_AX_DX		EX_TYPE_FLAG(3)

I'd like to buy two vowels: CL̲E̲AR

(I hope that Wheel of Fortune reference isn't too US-centric.)

> +static inline unsigned long *pt_regs_nr(struct pt_regs *regs, int nr)
> +{
> +	/* because having pt_regs in machine order was too much to ask */
> +	switch (nr) {
> +	case 0:		return &regs->ax;
> +	case 1:		return &regs->cx;
> +	case 2:		return &regs->dx;
> +	case 3:		return &regs->bx;
> +	case 4:		return &regs->sp;
> +	case 5:		return &regs->bp;
> +	case 6:		return &regs->si;
> +	case 7:		return &regs->di;
> +#ifdef CONFIG_X86_64
> +	case 8:		return &regs->r8;
> +	case 9:		return &regs->r9;
> +	case 10:	return &regs->r10;
> +	case 11:	return &regs->r11;
> +	case 12:	return &regs->r12;
> +	case 13:	return &regs->r13;
> +	case 14:	return &regs->r14;
> +	case 15:	return &regs->r15;
> +#endif
> +	default:	return NULL;
> +	}
> +}

Instead of all this craziness, why not just admit defeat and put them in
pt_regs order in the 'extable_type_reg' macro?

> +static bool ex_handler_imm_reg(const struct exception_table_entry *fixup,
> +			       struct pt_regs *regs, int reg, int imm)
> +{
> +	*pt_regs_nr(regs, reg) = (long)imm;
> +	return ex_handler_default(fixup, regs);
> +}
> +
> +#define EX_TYPE_MASK	0x000000FF
> +#define EX_REG_MASK	0x00000F00
> +#define EX_FLAG_MASK	0x0000F000
> +#define EX_IMM_MASK	0xFFFF0000

To avoid mismatches these should probably be in the header file next to
EX_TYPE_*_SHIFT?

> +
>  int ex_get_fixup_type(unsigned long ip)
>  {
>  	const struct exception_table_entry *e = search_exception_tables(ip);
>  
> -	return e ? e->type : EX_TYPE_NONE;
> +	return e ? FIELD_GET(EX_TYPE_MASK, e->type) : EX_TYPE_NONE;

Maybe the 'type' field should be renamed, to better represent its new
use, and to try to discourage direct access.  Not that I have any good
ideas.  Some not-so-good ideas: "handler", "flags", "_type".

-- 
Josh

