From: linux@armlinux.org.uk (Russell King - ARM Linux)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH 1/5] bus: arm-cci: use asm unreachable
Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2018 23:30:46 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180320233046.GL2743@n2100.armlinux.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180320230206.25289-2-stefan@agner.ch>
On Wed, Mar 21, 2018 at 12:02:02AM +0100, Stefan Agner wrote:
> Mixing asm and C code is not recommended in a naked function by
> gcc and leads to an error when using clang:
> drivers/bus/arm-cci.c:2107:2: error: non-ASM statement in naked
> function is not supported
> unreachable();
> ^
>
> Instead of using the unreachable() macro use the assember variant
> ASM_UNREACHABLE. This will no longer emit __builtin_unreachable(),
> but since the function is naked and its return type is void it seems
> not to have aversive effects.
I think that unreachable() there is rather silly - this function
*does* return, and the comments say as much. Just delete the silly
"unreachable()", there's no need to put an ASM_UNREACHABLE in there.
The function is not declared as not returning, and nothing in this
file uses it anyway - it's called from the mcpm code, which also
_does_ expect this function to return (if it doesn't, then we're
basically saying the CPU that called it is dead.)
>
> Signed-off-by: Stefan Agner <stefan@agner.ch>
> ---
> drivers/bus/arm-cci.c | 3 +--
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/bus/arm-cci.c b/drivers/bus/arm-cci.c
> index 5426c04fe24b..ee9da86fec47 100644
> --- a/drivers/bus/arm-cci.c
> +++ b/drivers/bus/arm-cci.c
> @@ -2084,6 +2084,7 @@ asmlinkage void __naked cci_enable_port_for_self(void)
>
> " mov r0, #0 \n"
> " bx lr \n"
> + ASM_UNREACHABLE
>
> " .align 2 \n"
> "5: .word cpu_port - . \n"
> @@ -2103,8 +2104,6 @@ asmlinkage void __naked cci_enable_port_for_self(void)
> [sizeof_struct_cpu_port] "i" (sizeof(struct cpu_port)),
> [sizeof_struct_ace_port] "i" (sizeof(struct cci_ace_port)),
> [offsetof_port_phys] "i" (offsetof(struct cci_ace_port, phys)) );
> -
> - unreachable();
> }
>
> /**
> --
> 2.16.2
>
--
RMK's Patch system: http://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/
FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line in suburbia: sync at 8.8Mbps down 630kbps up
According to speedtest.net: 8.21Mbps down 510kbps up
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@armlinux.org.uk>
To: Stefan Agner <stefan@agner.ch>
Cc: ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org, arnd@arndb.de,
nicolas.pitre@linaro.org, marc.zyngier@arm.com,
behanw@converseincode.com, keescook@chromium.org,
Bernhard.Rosenkranzer@linaro.org, mka@chromium.org,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] bus: arm-cci: use asm unreachable
Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2018 23:30:46 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180320233046.GL2743@n2100.armlinux.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180320230206.25289-2-stefan@agner.ch>
On Wed, Mar 21, 2018 at 12:02:02AM +0100, Stefan Agner wrote:
> Mixing asm and C code is not recommended in a naked function by
> gcc and leads to an error when using clang:
> drivers/bus/arm-cci.c:2107:2: error: non-ASM statement in naked
> function is not supported
> unreachable();
> ^
>
> Instead of using the unreachable() macro use the assember variant
> ASM_UNREACHABLE. This will no longer emit __builtin_unreachable(),
> but since the function is naked and its return type is void it seems
> not to have aversive effects.
I think that unreachable() there is rather silly - this function
*does* return, and the comments say as much. Just delete the silly
"unreachable()", there's no need to put an ASM_UNREACHABLE in there.
The function is not declared as not returning, and nothing in this
file uses it anyway - it's called from the mcpm code, which also
_does_ expect this function to return (if it doesn't, then we're
basically saying the CPU that called it is dead.)
>
> Signed-off-by: Stefan Agner <stefan@agner.ch>
> ---
> drivers/bus/arm-cci.c | 3 +--
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/bus/arm-cci.c b/drivers/bus/arm-cci.c
> index 5426c04fe24b..ee9da86fec47 100644
> --- a/drivers/bus/arm-cci.c
> +++ b/drivers/bus/arm-cci.c
> @@ -2084,6 +2084,7 @@ asmlinkage void __naked cci_enable_port_for_self(void)
>
> " mov r0, #0 \n"
> " bx lr \n"
> + ASM_UNREACHABLE
>
> " .align 2 \n"
> "5: .word cpu_port - . \n"
> @@ -2103,8 +2104,6 @@ asmlinkage void __naked cci_enable_port_for_self(void)
> [sizeof_struct_cpu_port] "i" (sizeof(struct cpu_port)),
> [sizeof_struct_ace_port] "i" (sizeof(struct cci_ace_port)),
> [offsetof_port_phys] "i" (offsetof(struct cci_ace_port, phys)) );
> -
> - unreachable();
> }
>
> /**
> --
> 2.16.2
>
--
RMK's Patch system: http://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/
FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line in suburbia: sync at 8.8Mbps down 630kbps up
According to speedtest.net: 8.21Mbps down 510kbps up
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-03-20 23:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 46+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-03-20 23:02 [PATCH 0/5] ARM: clang support Stefan Agner
2018-03-20 23:02 ` Stefan Agner
2018-03-20 23:02 ` [PATCH 1/5] bus: arm-cci: use asm unreachable Stefan Agner
2018-03-20 23:02 ` Stefan Agner
2018-03-20 23:30 ` Russell King - ARM Linux [this message]
2018-03-20 23:30 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2018-03-21 8:22 ` Stefan Agner
2018-03-21 8:22 ` Stefan Agner
2018-03-20 23:02 ` [PATCH 2/5] efi/libstub/arm: add support for building with clang Stefan Agner
2018-03-20 23:02 ` Stefan Agner
2018-03-20 23:02 ` [PATCH 3/5] ARM: trusted_foundations: do not use naked function Stefan Agner
2018-03-20 23:02 ` Stefan Agner
2018-03-20 23:13 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2018-03-20 23:13 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2018-03-21 8:41 ` Stefan Agner
2018-03-21 8:41 ` Stefan Agner
2018-03-21 12:13 ` Robin Murphy
2018-03-21 12:13 ` Robin Murphy
2018-03-21 14:09 ` Stefan Agner
2018-03-21 14:09 ` Stefan Agner
2018-03-21 15:26 ` Dmitry Osipenko
2018-03-21 15:26 ` Dmitry Osipenko
2018-03-21 16:40 ` Stephen Warren
2018-03-21 16:40 ` Stephen Warren
2018-03-21 17:16 ` Robin Murphy
2018-03-21 17:16 ` Robin Murphy
2018-03-21 21:41 ` Stefan Agner
2018-03-21 21:41 ` Stefan Agner
2018-03-22 11:48 ` Robin Murphy
2018-03-22 11:48 ` Robin Murphy
2018-03-22 12:43 ` Stefan Agner
2018-03-22 12:43 ` Stefan Agner
2018-03-22 14:03 ` Dmitry Osipenko
2018-03-22 14:03 ` Dmitry Osipenko
2018-03-20 23:02 ` [PATCH 4/5] ARM: drop no-thumb-interwork in EABI mode Stefan Agner
2018-03-20 23:02 ` Stefan Agner
2018-03-20 23:02 ` [PATCH 5/5] ARM: add support for building ARM kernel with clang Stefan Agner
2018-03-20 23:02 ` Stefan Agner
2018-03-20 23:18 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2018-03-20 23:18 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2018-03-21 0:20 ` Matthias Kaehlcke
2018-03-21 0:20 ` Matthias Kaehlcke
2018-03-21 9:03 ` Stefan Agner
2018-03-21 9:03 ` Stefan Agner
2018-03-25 13:24 ` Stefan Agner
2018-03-25 13:24 ` Stefan Agner
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=20180320233046.GL2743@n2100.armlinux.org.uk \
--to=linux@armlinux.org.uk \
--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.