From: Jisheng Zhang <jszhang@kernel.org>
To: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@kernel.org>,
Jason Baron <jbaron@akamai.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] arm64: jump_label: mark arguments as const to satisfy asm constraints
Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2022 19:53:59 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Yz7B1991xDY9ZtfL@xhacker> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Yz6qksBFFj9Wo9M8@FVFF77S0Q05N.cambridge.arm.com>
On Thu, Oct 06, 2022 at 11:14:42AM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 06, 2022 at 03:55:41PM +0800, Jisheng Zhang wrote:
> > Inspired by x86 commit 864b435514b2("x86/jump_label: Mark arguments as
> > const to satisfy asm constraints"), mark arch_static_branch()'s and
> > arch_static_branch_jump()'s arguments as const to satisfy asm
> > constraints. And Steven in [1] also pointed out that "The "i"
> > constraint needs to be a constant."
>
> It needs to be a *compile-time constant*, but `const` on a function argument
> only ensures that the function can't modify the argument, not that it's a
compile-time constant is a subset of `const`.
> constant in the caller.
>
> I think this is a quirk of the optimizer rather than anything else.
I dunno compiler internals, just tried as commit 864b435514b2 suggested
the issue did disappear.
PS: I agree with you about this is a quirk or workaround.
>
> > Tested with building a simple external kernel module with "O0".
>
> Is building with `-O0` supported? I thought we required using `-O2` or above
> for a bunch of code that requires constant propagation, etc.
Per the information of Jason's reply in [1]: the reason tring O0/O1 is "to
play around with GCC's new static analyzer options".
While the reason I constify the arguments is that: in riscv world, even the
"-Os" can also reproduce the warnings and errors[2]. Grepping source found
arm64 also shares the same style, so these two patches.
[2]https://lore.kernel.org/linux-riscv/20220922060958.44203-1-samuel@sholland.org/
>
> I don't really have a problem with making this const, but I don't particularly
> want to try to "fix" all the other code that depends on constant propagation to
> assemble, and I'm worried this is the canary in the coal mine.
IMHO, it's a good idea to constify if the arguments can't be modified.
>
> Thanks,
> Mark.
>
> >
> > [1]https://lore.kernel.org/all/20210212094059.5f8d05e8@gandalf.local.home/
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Jisheng Zhang <jszhang@kernel.org>
> > ---
> > arch/arm64/include/asm/jump_label.h | 8 ++++----
> > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/jump_label.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/jump_label.h
> > index cea441b6aa5d..48ddc0f45d22 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/jump_label.h
> > +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/jump_label.h
> > @@ -15,8 +15,8 @@
> >
> > #define JUMP_LABEL_NOP_SIZE AARCH64_INSN_SIZE
> >
> > -static __always_inline bool arch_static_branch(struct static_key *key,
> > - bool branch)
> > +static __always_inline bool arch_static_branch(struct static_key * const key,
> > + const bool branch)
> > {
> > asm_volatile_goto(
> > "1: nop \n\t"
> > @@ -32,8 +32,8 @@ static __always_inline bool arch_static_branch(struct static_key *key,
> > return true;
> > }
> >
> > -static __always_inline bool arch_static_branch_jump(struct static_key *key,
> > - bool branch)
> > +static __always_inline bool arch_static_branch_jump(struct static_key * const key,
> > + const bool branch)
> > {
> > asm_volatile_goto(
> > "1: b %l[l_yes] \n\t"
> > --
> > 2.37.2
> >
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-10-06 12:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-10-06 7:55 [PATCH 0/2] arm64: constify arguments to satisfy asm constraints Jisheng Zhang
2022-10-06 7:55 ` [PATCH 1/2] arm64: jump_label: mark arguments as const " Jisheng Zhang
2022-10-06 8:17 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2022-10-06 8:46 ` Jisheng Zhang
2022-10-06 8:55 ` Jisheng Zhang
2022-10-06 9:08 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2022-10-06 11:04 ` Jisheng Zhang
2022-10-06 10:14 ` Mark Rutland
2022-10-06 11:53 ` Jisheng Zhang [this message]
2022-10-06 7:55 ` [PATCH 2/2] arm64: alternative: constify alternative_has_feature_* argument Jisheng Zhang
2022-11-07 19:08 ` [PATCH 0/2] arm64: constify arguments to satisfy asm constraints Will Deacon
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=Yz7B1991xDY9ZtfL@xhacker \
--to=jszhang@kernel.org \
--cc=ardb@kernel.org \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=jbaron@akamai.com \
--cc=jpoimboe@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=will@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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).