Re: [PATCH v4] xmalloc: add support for checking the pool integrity

[Julien Grall <julien.grall@linaro.org>]

Hi Jan,

On 17/12/14 10:40, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>> On 17.12.14 at 11:24, <julien.grall@linaro.org> wrote:
>> On 17/12/2014 10:11, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>>> On 16/12/14 23:37, Julien Grall wrote:
>>> Introducing a new bugframe is precicely what I meant by "this doesn't
>>> look hard".  x86 currently has one more bugframe than arm, being
>>> BUGFRAME_run_fn.
>>
>> And how do you pass the pointer of the function? As I said, ARM lacks of 
>> %c because of compiler issue.
> 
> First of all can you explain what compiler issue there is? Both
> {arm,aarch64}_print_operand() handle 'c' (but of course I can't
> tell whether correctly).

This has been added recently on aarch64 (late 2013) and there was an
outstanding bug on some version of GCC for arm
(https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48637)

FYI, the BUG support has been borrowed from Linux.

> And then can't you possibly find ways to deal with the # prefix
> added when not using 'c'? For the section name (if you need the
> section split in the first place) I would think a # should be fine,
> and the uses in expressions can surely be worked around by
> interposing an assembler macro (even if that macro may end up
> looking quite ugly).

We already have a working solution without BUGFRAME_run_fn. See the
implementation in xen/include/asm-arm.h.

I don't plan to work on modifying this code. But I would be happy if
someone post a patch to support BUGFRAME_run_fn.

Regards,

-- 
Julien Grall