From: mark.rutland@arm.com (Mark Rutland)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH] arm64: Fix multiple 'asm-operand-widths' warnings
Date: Tue, 2 May 2017 11:27:18 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170502102718.GA28132@leverpostej> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170501212622.153720-1-mka@chromium.org>
Hi Matthias,
On Mon, May 01, 2017 at 02:26:22PM -0700, Matthias Kaehlcke wrote:
> clang raises 'asm-operand-widths' warnings in inline assembly code when
> the size of an operand is < 64 bits and the operand width is unspecified.
> Most warnings are raised in macros, i.e. the datatype of the operand may
> vary. Forcing the use of an x register through the 'x' operand modifier
> would silence the warning however it involves the risk that for operands
> < 64 bits 'unused' bits may be assigned to 64-bit values (more details at
> http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2017-April/503816.html).
> Instead we cast the operand to 64 bits, which also forces the use of a
> x register, but without the unexpected behavior.
>
> In gic_write_bpr1() use write_sysreg_s() to write the register. This
> aligns the functions with others in this header and fixes an
> 'asm-operand-widths' warning.
>
> Signed-off-by: Matthias Kaehlcke <mka@chromium.org>
> ---
> arch/arm64/include/asm/arch_gicv3.h | 2 +-
> arch/arm64/include/asm/barrier.h | 2 +-
> arch/arm64/include/asm/uaccess.h | 2 +-
> arch/arm64/kernel/armv8_deprecated.c | 2 +-
> 4 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
Thanks for putting this together.
Just to check, are these the only instances that you see clang warning
about?
There are a number of other cases where we can see similar problems
(e.g. passing a u8 value to an smp_store_release() on a u32 variable),
so we need to fix more than the clang warnings.
I'm currently attempting a systematic audit of our inline asm to correct
all instances, looking at:
git grep -e asm \
--and --not -e 'include' \
--and --not -e 'asmlinkage' \
-- arch/arm64
I hope to have patches shortly, and will keep you informed.
Thanks,
Mark.
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/arch_gicv3.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/arch_gicv3.h
> index f37e3a21f6e7..9092d612d8c2 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/arch_gicv3.h
> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/arch_gicv3.h
> @@ -166,7 +166,7 @@ static inline void gic_write_sre(u32 val)
>
> static inline void gic_write_bpr1(u32 val)
> {
> - asm volatile("msr_s " __stringify(ICC_BPR1_EL1) ", %0" : : "r" (val));
> + write_sysreg_s(val, ICC_BPR1_EL1);
> }
>
> #define gic_read_typer(c) readq_relaxed(c)
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/barrier.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/barrier.h
> index 4e0497f581a0..1248401b07ab 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/barrier.h
> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/barrier.h
> @@ -60,7 +60,7 @@ do { \
> break; \
> case 8: \
> asm volatile ("stlr %1, %0" \
> - : "=Q" (*p) : "r" (v) : "memory"); \
> + : "=Q" (*p) : "r" ((__u64)v) : "memory"); \
> break; \
> } \
> } while (0)
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/uaccess.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/uaccess.h
> index 5308d696311b..7db143689694 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/uaccess.h
> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/uaccess.h
> @@ -302,7 +302,7 @@ do { \
> " .previous\n" \
> _ASM_EXTABLE(1b, 3b) \
> : "+r" (err) \
> - : "r" (x), "r" (addr), "i" (-EFAULT))
> + : "r" ((__u64)x), "r" (addr), "i" (-EFAULT))
>
> #define __put_user_err(x, ptr, err) \
> do { \
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/armv8_deprecated.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/armv8_deprecated.c
> index 657977e77ec8..79b9fef48b14 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/armv8_deprecated.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/armv8_deprecated.c
> @@ -306,7 +306,7 @@ do { \
> _ASM_EXTABLE(0b, 4b) \
> _ASM_EXTABLE(1b, 4b) \
> : "=&r" (res), "+r" (data), "=&r" (temp), "=&r" (temp2) \
> - : "r" (addr), "i" (-EAGAIN), "i" (-EFAULT), \
> + : "r" ((__u64)addr), "i" (-EAGAIN), "i" (-EFAULT), \
> "i" (__SWP_LL_SC_LOOPS) \
> : "memory"); \
> uaccess_disable(); \
> --
> 2.13.0.rc0.306.g87b477812d-goog
>
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
To: Matthias Kaehlcke <mka@chromium.org>
Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>,
Christoffer Dall <christoffer.dall@linaro.org>,
Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com>,
Vladimir Murzin <vladimir.murzin@arm.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Grant Grundler <grundler@chromium.org>,
Greg Hackmann <ghackmann@google.com>,
Michael Davidson <md@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64: Fix multiple 'asm-operand-widths' warnings
Date: Tue, 2 May 2017 11:27:18 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170502102718.GA28132@leverpostej> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170501212622.153720-1-mka@chromium.org>
Hi Matthias,
On Mon, May 01, 2017 at 02:26:22PM -0700, Matthias Kaehlcke wrote:
> clang raises 'asm-operand-widths' warnings in inline assembly code when
> the size of an operand is < 64 bits and the operand width is unspecified.
> Most warnings are raised in macros, i.e. the datatype of the operand may
> vary. Forcing the use of an x register through the 'x' operand modifier
> would silence the warning however it involves the risk that for operands
> < 64 bits 'unused' bits may be assigned to 64-bit values (more details at
> http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2017-April/503816.html).
> Instead we cast the operand to 64 bits, which also forces the use of a
> x register, but without the unexpected behavior.
>
> In gic_write_bpr1() use write_sysreg_s() to write the register. This
> aligns the functions with others in this header and fixes an
> 'asm-operand-widths' warning.
>
> Signed-off-by: Matthias Kaehlcke <mka@chromium.org>
> ---
> arch/arm64/include/asm/arch_gicv3.h | 2 +-
> arch/arm64/include/asm/barrier.h | 2 +-
> arch/arm64/include/asm/uaccess.h | 2 +-
> arch/arm64/kernel/armv8_deprecated.c | 2 +-
> 4 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
Thanks for putting this together.
Just to check, are these the only instances that you see clang warning
about?
There are a number of other cases where we can see similar problems
(e.g. passing a u8 value to an smp_store_release() on a u32 variable),
so we need to fix more than the clang warnings.
I'm currently attempting a systematic audit of our inline asm to correct
all instances, looking at:
git grep -e asm \
--and --not -e 'include' \
--and --not -e 'asmlinkage' \
-- arch/arm64
I hope to have patches shortly, and will keep you informed.
Thanks,
Mark.
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/arch_gicv3.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/arch_gicv3.h
> index f37e3a21f6e7..9092d612d8c2 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/arch_gicv3.h
> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/arch_gicv3.h
> @@ -166,7 +166,7 @@ static inline void gic_write_sre(u32 val)
>
> static inline void gic_write_bpr1(u32 val)
> {
> - asm volatile("msr_s " __stringify(ICC_BPR1_EL1) ", %0" : : "r" (val));
> + write_sysreg_s(val, ICC_BPR1_EL1);
> }
>
> #define gic_read_typer(c) readq_relaxed(c)
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/barrier.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/barrier.h
> index 4e0497f581a0..1248401b07ab 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/barrier.h
> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/barrier.h
> @@ -60,7 +60,7 @@ do { \
> break; \
> case 8: \
> asm volatile ("stlr %1, %0" \
> - : "=Q" (*p) : "r" (v) : "memory"); \
> + : "=Q" (*p) : "r" ((__u64)v) : "memory"); \
> break; \
> } \
> } while (0)
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/uaccess.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/uaccess.h
> index 5308d696311b..7db143689694 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/uaccess.h
> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/uaccess.h
> @@ -302,7 +302,7 @@ do { \
> " .previous\n" \
> _ASM_EXTABLE(1b, 3b) \
> : "+r" (err) \
> - : "r" (x), "r" (addr), "i" (-EFAULT))
> + : "r" ((__u64)x), "r" (addr), "i" (-EFAULT))
>
> #define __put_user_err(x, ptr, err) \
> do { \
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/armv8_deprecated.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/armv8_deprecated.c
> index 657977e77ec8..79b9fef48b14 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/armv8_deprecated.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/armv8_deprecated.c
> @@ -306,7 +306,7 @@ do { \
> _ASM_EXTABLE(0b, 4b) \
> _ASM_EXTABLE(1b, 4b) \
> : "=&r" (res), "+r" (data), "=&r" (temp), "=&r" (temp2) \
> - : "r" (addr), "i" (-EAGAIN), "i" (-EFAULT), \
> + : "r" ((__u64)addr), "i" (-EAGAIN), "i" (-EFAULT), \
> "i" (__SWP_LL_SC_LOOPS) \
> : "memory"); \
> uaccess_disable(); \
> --
> 2.13.0.rc0.306.g87b477812d-goog
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-05-02 10:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-05-01 21:26 [PATCH] arm64: Fix multiple 'asm-operand-widths' warnings Matthias Kaehlcke
2017-05-01 21:26 ` Matthias Kaehlcke
2017-05-02 8:25 ` Marc Zyngier
2017-05-02 8:25 ` Marc Zyngier
2017-05-02 10:27 ` Mark Rutland [this message]
2017-05-02 10:27 ` Mark Rutland
2017-05-02 17:26 ` Matthias Kaehlcke
2017-05-02 17:26 ` Matthias Kaehlcke
2017-05-02 17:29 ` Mark Rutland
2017-05-02 17:29 ` Mark Rutland
2017-05-02 18:52 ` Matthias Kaehlcke
2017-05-02 18:52 ` Matthias Kaehlcke
2017-05-03 10:51 ` Mark Rutland
2017-05-03 10:51 ` Mark Rutland
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=20170502102718.GA28132@leverpostej \
--to=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.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.