From: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
To: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>
Cc: KVM devel mailing list <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Greg Hackmann <ghackmann@google.com>,
Michael Davidson <md@google.com>,
Grant Grundler <grundler@chromium.org>,
Matthias Kaehlcke <mka@chromium.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>,
"kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu" <kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] arm64: Add ASM modifier for xN register operands
Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2017 15:47:45 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170428144745.GR13675@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAKv+Gu8h46WS4dq9ge4VnmBTvo5L9RJYUSYXnVpJf+G+av6+dg@mail.gmail.com>
On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 03:43:56PM +0100, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> On 28 April 2017 at 15:33, Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com> wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 08:18:52AM +0100, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> OK, good. That is a departure from previous behavior of Clang, which
> was causing build errors before due to the fact that msr/mrs
> instructions involving 32-bit values must still use x registers.
>
> > * If an operand type is 64 bits in size, clang will not produce a warning
> > regarding the operand size.
> >
> > * If an x or w modifier is used, clang will not produce a warning
> > regarding the operand size, regardless of whether it matches the
> > register size. Clang is happy for %wN to be used on a pointer type.
> >
> > * If an operand type is less than 64 bits in size, and neither an x or
> > w modifier is used, clang will produce a warning as above.
> >
> > * If an operand type is greater than 64 bits in size, clang encounters
> > an internal error.
> >
> > Given that, I think we *should not* use the x modifier to suppress this
> > warning, as I think for those cases we have a potential bug as outlined
> > in my prior reply.
> >
> > Instead, we should use a temporary 64-bit variable (or cast input
> > operands to 64-bit), which avoids that and makes clang happy.
> >
>
> Yes, I think that makes sense.
Likewise, we could even raise a feature request against GCC because these
warnings actually sound useful. Thanks for getting to the bottom of this.
Will
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: will.deacon@arm.com (Will Deacon)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH v2] arm64: Add ASM modifier for xN register operands
Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2017 15:47:45 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170428144745.GR13675@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAKv+Gu8h46WS4dq9ge4VnmBTvo5L9RJYUSYXnVpJf+G+av6+dg@mail.gmail.com>
On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 03:43:56PM +0100, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> On 28 April 2017 at 15:33, Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com> wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 08:18:52AM +0100, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> OK, good. That is a departure from previous behavior of Clang, which
> was causing build errors before due to the fact that msr/mrs
> instructions involving 32-bit values must still use x registers.
>
> > * If an operand type is 64 bits in size, clang will not produce a warning
> > regarding the operand size.
> >
> > * If an x or w modifier is used, clang will not produce a warning
> > regarding the operand size, regardless of whether it matches the
> > register size. Clang is happy for %wN to be used on a pointer type.
> >
> > * If an operand type is less than 64 bits in size, and neither an x or
> > w modifier is used, clang will produce a warning as above.
> >
> > * If an operand type is greater than 64 bits in size, clang encounters
> > an internal error.
> >
> > Given that, I think we *should not* use the x modifier to suppress this
> > warning, as I think for those cases we have a potential bug as outlined
> > in my prior reply.
> >
> > Instead, we should use a temporary 64-bit variable (or cast input
> > operands to 64-bit), which avoids that and makes clang happy.
> >
>
> Yes, I think that makes sense.
Likewise, we could even raise a feature request against GCC because these
warnings actually sound useful. Thanks for getting to the bottom of this.
Will
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
To: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>
Cc: "Mark Rutland" <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
"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>,
"Radim Krčmář" <rkrcmar@redhat.com>, "Tejun Heo" <tj@kernel.org>,
"Christoph Lameter" <cl@linux.com>,
"Vladimir Murzin" <vladimir.murzin@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>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] arm64: Add ASM modifier for xN register operands
Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2017 15:47:45 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170428144745.GR13675@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAKv+Gu8h46WS4dq9ge4VnmBTvo5L9RJYUSYXnVpJf+G+av6+dg@mail.gmail.com>
On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 03:43:56PM +0100, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> On 28 April 2017 at 15:33, Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com> wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 08:18:52AM +0100, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> OK, good. That is a departure from previous behavior of Clang, which
> was causing build errors before due to the fact that msr/mrs
> instructions involving 32-bit values must still use x registers.
>
> > * If an operand type is 64 bits in size, clang will not produce a warning
> > regarding the operand size.
> >
> > * If an x or w modifier is used, clang will not produce a warning
> > regarding the operand size, regardless of whether it matches the
> > register size. Clang is happy for %wN to be used on a pointer type.
> >
> > * If an operand type is less than 64 bits in size, and neither an x or
> > w modifier is used, clang will produce a warning as above.
> >
> > * If an operand type is greater than 64 bits in size, clang encounters
> > an internal error.
> >
> > Given that, I think we *should not* use the x modifier to suppress this
> > warning, as I think for those cases we have a potential bug as outlined
> > in my prior reply.
> >
> > Instead, we should use a temporary 64-bit variable (or cast input
> > operands to 64-bit), which avoids that and makes clang happy.
> >
>
> Yes, I think that makes sense.
Likewise, we could even raise a feature request against GCC because these
warnings actually sound useful. Thanks for getting to the bottom of this.
Will
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-04-28 14:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-04-26 21:46 [PATCH v2] arm64: Add ASM modifier for xN register operands Matthias Kaehlcke
2017-04-26 21:46 ` Matthias Kaehlcke
2017-04-27 11:02 ` Mark Rutland
2017-04-27 11:02 ` Mark Rutland
2017-04-27 11:02 ` Mark Rutland
2017-04-27 22:52 ` Matthias Kaehlcke
2017-04-27 22:52 ` Matthias Kaehlcke
2017-04-27 22:52 ` Matthias Kaehlcke
2017-04-28 7:18 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2017-04-28 7:18 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2017-04-28 7:18 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2017-04-28 9:53 ` Mark Rutland
2017-04-28 9:53 ` Mark Rutland
2017-04-28 9:53 ` Mark Rutland
2017-04-28 10:20 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2017-04-28 10:20 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2017-04-28 10:20 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2017-04-28 10:32 ` Mark Rutland
2017-04-28 10:32 ` Mark Rutland
2017-04-28 10:32 ` Mark Rutland
2017-04-28 14:33 ` Mark Rutland
2017-04-28 14:33 ` Mark Rutland
2017-04-28 14:33 ` Mark Rutland
2017-04-28 14:43 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2017-04-28 14:43 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2017-04-28 14:43 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2017-04-28 14:47 ` Will Deacon [this message]
2017-04-28 14:47 ` Will Deacon
2017-04-28 14:47 ` Will Deacon
2017-04-28 19:08 ` Matthias Kaehlcke
2017-04-28 19:08 ` Matthias Kaehlcke
2017-04-28 19:08 ` Matthias Kaehlcke
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=20170428144745.GR13675@arm.com \
--to=will.deacon@arm.com \
--cc=ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=cl@linux.com \
--cc=ghackmann@google.com \
--cc=grundler@chromium.org \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=marc.zyngier@arm.com \
--cc=md@google.com \
--cc=mka@chromium.org \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=tj@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 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.