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 S1172434AbdDXRXB (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Mon, 24 Apr 2017 13:23:01 -0400
Received: from mail-io0-f181.google.com ([209.85.223.181]:36393 "EHLO
        mail-io0-f181.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1171761AbdDXRWw (ORCPT
        <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Mon, 24 Apr 2017 13:22:52 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20170424170009.GT12323@arm.com>
References: <20170420183053.718-1-mka@chromium.org> <20170424170009.GT12323@arm.com>
From: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>
Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2017 18:22:51 +0100
Message-ID: <CAKv+Gu_Ms73qfFFjmhkwF9Rh2jBM6Cx9LfuSHPUnXv0GTR1z7w@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64: Add ASM modifier for xN register operands
To: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
Cc: Matthias Kaehlcke <mka@chromium.org>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
        Christoffer Dall <christoffer.dall@linaro.org>,
        Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com>,
        Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
        =?UTF-8?B?UmFkaW0gS3LEjW3DocWZ?= <rkrcmar@redhat.com>,
        Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>, Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>,
        Vladimir Murzin <vladimir.murzin@arm.com>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
        "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" 
        <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
        "kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu" <kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu>,
        KVM devel mailing list <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Grant Grundler <grundler@chromium.org>,
        Greg Hackmann <ghackmann@google.com>, Michael Davidson <md@google.com>
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 24 April 2017 at 18:00, Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com> wrote:
> Hi Matthias,
>
> On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 11:30:53AM -0700, Matthias Kaehlcke wrote:
>> Many inline assembly statements don't include the 'x' modifier when
>> using xN registers as operands. This is perfectly valid, however it
>> causes clang to raise warnings like this:
>>
>> warning: value size does not match register size specified by the
>>   constraint and modifier [-Wasm-operand-widths]
>> ...
>> arch/arm64/include/asm/barrier.h:62:23: note: expanded from macro
>>   '__smp_store_release'
>>     asm volatile ("stlr %1, %0"
>
> If I understand this correctly, then the warning is emitted when we pass
> in a value smaller than 64-bit, but refer to %<n> without a modifier
> in the inline asm.
>
> However, if that's the case then I don't understand why:
>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/io.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/io.h
>> index 0c00c87bb9dd..021e1733da0c 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/io.h
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/io.h
>> @@ -39,33 +39,33 @@
>>  #define __raw_writeb __raw_writeb
>>  static inline void __raw_writeb(u8 val, volatile void __iomem *addr)
>>  {
>> -     asm volatile("strb %w0, [%1]" : : "rZ" (val), "r" (addr));
>> +     asm volatile("strb %w0, [%x1]" : : "rZ" (val), "r" (addr));
>
> is necessary. addr is a pointer type, so is 64-bit.
>
> Given that the scattergun nature of this patch implies that you've been
> fixing the places where warnings are reported, then I'm confused as to
> why a warning is generated for the case above.
>
> What am I missing?
>

AIUI, Clang now always complains for missing register width modifiers,
not just for placeholders that resolve to a 32-bit (or smaller)
quantity.