All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
To: Roland McGrath <roland@redhat.com>
Cc: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@novell.com>,
	heukelum@fastmail.fm, Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Alexander van Heukelum <heukelum@mailshack.com>,
	Glauber Costa <gcosta@redhat.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC,v2] x86_64: save_args out of line
Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2008 21:09:59 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20081119200959.GA31867@elte.hu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20081119103415.GA16516@elte.hu>


* Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> wrote:

> What _clearly_ sucks is the current mess of:
> 
>         CFI_ADJUST_CFA_OFFSET   8
>         /*CFI_REL_OFFSET        ss,0*/
>         pushq %rax /* rsp */
>         CFI_ADJUST_CFA_OFFSET   8
>         CFI_REL_OFFSET  rsp,0
>         pushq $(1<<9) /* eflags - interrupts on */
>         CFI_ADJUST_CFA_OFFSET   8
>         /*CFI_REL_OFFSET        rflags,0*/
>         pushq $__KERNEL_CS /* cs */
>         CFI_ADJUST_CFA_OFFSET   8
>         /*CFI_REL_OFFSET        cs,0*/
>         pushq \child_rip /* rip */
>         CFI_ADJUST_CFA_OFFSET   8
>         CFI_REL_OFFSET  rip,0
>         pushq   %rax /* orig rax */
>         CFI_ADJUST_CFA_OFFSET   8
> 
> Compared to what we could have (stupid mockup):
> 
>         pushq_cf1 %rax			/* rsp */
>         pushq_cf1 $(1<<9)		/* eflags - interrupts on */
>         pushq_cf1 $__KERNEL_CS		/* cs */
>         pushq_cf2 \child_rip		/* rip */
>         pushq_cf1 %rax			/* orig rax */
> 
> Whoever claims that this cannot be automated in _large_ part isnt 
> thinking it through really. Those CFI annotations should never have 
> been added in this form.

Something like this would be a lot cleaner equivalent replacement:

         PUSHQ %rax			/* rsp 			  */
         PUSHQ $(1<<9)			/* eflags - interrupts on */
         PUSHQ $__KERNEL_CS		/* cs 			  */
         PUSHQ \child_rip		/* rip			  */
          cfi_map rip, 0
         PUSHQ %rax			/* orig rax		  */

as most of the really annoying CFI annotations in entry_64.S that 
obscruct code reading are just plain CFA offset modifications related 
to stack shuffling.

[ Sidenote: trying to connect up RIP like that in the FAKE_STACK_FRAME
  is pretty wrong to begin with - the annotation is incomplete up to
  this point. ]

The problems are not caused by the prologue or epilogue annotations, 
nor by any of the trickier stack shuffling annotations we do around 
syscall/sysret and around exception frames. A lot of the frame formats 
we use are special, controlled by hw details and we do have to map 
those details to the debuginfo - it's an inevitably manual piece of 
work.

It's the plain crappy:

        pushq %rdi
        CFI_ADJUST_CFA_OFFSET 8
        call schedule
        popq  %rdi
        CFI_ADJUST_CFA_OFFSET -8

annotation spam that hurts readability the most. The "+8" and "-8" 
CFA-offset lines are completely uninformative and they obsctruct the 
reading of this already very trick type of source code (assembly 
language).

It should be something like this:

        PUSHQ %rdi
        call schedule
        POPQ %rdi

instead.

	Ingo

  reply	other threads:[~2008-11-19 20:10 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 75+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2008-11-16 14:29 [PATCH] trivial, entry_64: remove whitespace at end of lines Alexander van Heukelum
2008-11-16 14:29 ` [RFC] x86: save_args out of line Alexander van Heukelum
2008-11-17 12:14   ` Glauber Costa
2008-11-17 15:13     ` Alexander van Heukelum
2008-11-17 12:53   ` Andi Kleen
2008-11-17 15:37     ` Alexander van Heukelum
2008-11-17 18:23       ` Andi Kleen
2008-11-17 19:22         ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2008-11-17 19:29           ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2008-11-17 19:49             ` Alexander van Heukelum
2008-11-17 19:54               ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2008-11-17 19:43           ` Alexander van Heukelum
2008-11-17 19:49             ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2008-11-17 17:52   ` [RFC,v2] x86_64: " Alexander van Heukelum
2008-11-18  8:09     ` Jan Beulich
2008-11-18 11:16       ` Alexander van Heukelum
2008-11-18 12:51         ` Jan Beulich
2008-11-18 14:03           ` Ingo Molnar
2008-11-18 14:52             ` Jan Beulich
2008-11-18 15:00               ` Ingo Molnar
2008-11-18 22:53                 ` Roland McGrath
2008-11-18 23:35                   ` Andi Kleen
2008-11-18 23:36                     ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2008-11-18 23:44                       ` H. Peter Anvin
2008-11-19  0:08                         ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2008-11-18 23:45                     ` Roland McGrath
2008-11-19  0:06                       ` Andi Kleen
2008-11-19  0:01                         ` H. Peter Anvin
2008-11-19 10:34                   ` Ingo Molnar
2008-11-19 20:09                     ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2008-11-19  0:18     ` [PATCH/RFC] Move entry_64.S register saving out of the macros Alexander van Heukelum
2008-11-19 17:54       ` H. Peter Anvin
2008-11-19 20:16         ` Ingo Molnar
2008-11-20 13:40       ` [PATCH] x86: clean up after: move " Alexander van Heukelum
2008-11-20 14:01         ` Andi Kleen
2008-11-20 15:04         ` Ingo Molnar
2008-11-20 15:26           ` Alexander van Heukelum
2008-11-20 15:39             ` Ingo Molnar
2008-11-20 15:50               ` [PATCH] x86: clean up after: move entry_64.S register savingout " Jan Beulich
2008-11-20 15:57               ` [PATCH] x86: clean up after: move entry_64.S register saving out " Alexander van Heukelum
2008-11-20 16:07                 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2008-11-20 16:29                 ` Alexander van Heukelum
2008-11-20 17:24                 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-11-21 15:41               ` [PATCH] x86: Introduce save_rest and restructure the PTREGSCALL macro in entry_64.S Alexander van Heukelum
2008-11-21 15:43                 ` [PATCH] x86: entry_64.S: Factor out save_paranoid and paranoid_exit Alexander van Heukelum
2008-11-21 15:44                   ` [PATCH] Split out some macro's and move common code to paranoid_exit Alexander van Heukelum
2008-11-21 16:06                     ` Ingo Molnar
2008-11-23  9:08                       ` [PATCH] x86: include ENTRY/END in entry handlers in entry_64.S Alexander van Heukelum
2008-11-23  9:15                         ` [PATCH] x86: KPROBE_ENTRY should be paired wth KPROBE_END Alexander van Heukelum
2008-11-23 13:27                           ` Ingo Molnar
2008-11-23 13:51                             ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2008-11-23 14:12                               ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2008-11-23 14:55                                 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-11-23 15:04                                   ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2008-11-23 15:04                                 ` Alexander van Heukelum
2008-11-23 15:12                                   ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2008-11-23 15:31                                     ` Ingo Molnar
2008-11-23 15:41                                       ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2008-11-23 15:37                                   ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2008-11-23 16:29                                     ` Ingo Molnar
2008-11-24  9:17                           ` Jan Beulich
2008-11-24 10:26                             ` Alexander van Heukelum
2008-11-24 10:35                               ` Jan Beulich
2008-11-24 12:24                                 ` [PATCH] x86_64: get rid of the use of KPROBE_ENTRY / KPROBE_END Alexander van Heukelum
2008-11-24 13:33                                   ` Jan Beulich
2008-11-24 14:38                                     ` [PATCH] i386: " Alexander van Heukelum
2008-11-23  9:21                         ` [PATCH] x86: include ENTRY/END in entry handlers in entry_64.S Cyrill Gorcunov
2008-11-23 11:23                           ` Alexander van Heukelum
2008-11-23 11:35                             ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2008-11-23 20:13                             ` H. Peter Anvin
2008-11-24 10:06                               ` Alexander van Heukelum
2008-11-24 18:07                                 ` H. Peter Anvin
2008-11-23 13:23                         ` Ingo Molnar
2008-11-17  9:47 ` [PATCH] trivial, entry_64: remove whitespace at end of lines Ingo Molnar
2008-11-17 15:14   ` Alexander van Heukelum

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=20081119200959.GA31867@elte.hu \
    --to=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=andi@firstfloor.org \
    --cc=gcosta@redhat.com \
    --cc=heukelum@fastmail.fm \
    --cc=heukelum@mailshack.com \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=jbeulich@novell.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au \
    --cc=roland@redhat.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    /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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.