From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ABAF6C2BA83 for ; Fri, 14 Feb 2020 14:19:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7FCD122314 for ; Fri, 14 Feb 2020 14:19:34 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lists.infradead.org header.i=@lists.infradead.org header.b="Qc+oYWRb"; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="o/cKO9Kz" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 7FCD122314 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=kernel.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-arm-kernel-bounces+infradead-linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20170209; h=Sender:Content-Type: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Cc:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post:List-Archive: List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:Message-ID:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:To:From: Date:MIME-Version:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Owner; bh=9hB7hTHHBQxjf5GM1SuzGbzZJCTm6SHBJUtRRVcqMqc=; b=Qc+oYWRbGUD/ZBg9HQYM15EdH MNNA8iSotgrZjOYDetneln1FIGfDEAHTfdmc57vVOzqLxVuYBxDXYAfyUb2WLOrcKvZmNzFMmbphD CtpkgkXCBVx6HBg+idRB0IYLHjzUdpOK2fqmOWbKSU8ITkqHAym4N6tTj7RE9oO6upPLIjDIYkbwa 6jrBlt3hH+Yg/utNPgcR5RPUhIO4Pn8Y0CYT36+s/lzN+8w60r6YEXBzjaV7TpAdFgsfGfxrIwiPJ Qr5krM/tq4Y3k3vxHelifR+t649gNPL2LXWo1KLXnXS6fxwS5yNsv4pG+3RIccvwPhUZjkcvQiWoG VMhjHXrMA==; Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1j2boV-00055p-Ts; Fri, 14 Feb 2020 14:19:27 +0000 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1j2boS-00055J-Di for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Fri, 14 Feb 2020 14:19:25 +0000 Received: from disco-boy.misterjones.org (disco-boy.misterjones.org [51.254.78.96]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D74DA206B6; Fri, 14 Feb 2020 14:19:20 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1581689961; bh=VoFhf4zdTOyDrs9WxiWbFkep8aWMI/NkIQEpLgdHAjA=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=o/cKO9Kz9b3Kp6vLs8dIkD6hDZk6Nk1UAyhUHiYMLMjNuRAwzomQ88YU8iOzL1PF2 BN9xazvXxB89FbP08V43JOG1fOOQIGxzL6t4zCacfGcJzeO+qD0tvhZJB1HlsYGXeI BfGzCJyIgaGqAUbm4qgMvOlLxp8n64SA7NokBH2I= Received: from disco-boy.misterjones.org ([51.254.78.96] helo=www.loen.fr) by disco-boy.misterjones.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1j2boN-0057Sx-21; Fri, 14 Feb 2020 14:19:19 +0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2020 14:19:18 +0000 From: Marc Zyngier To: Mark Brown Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64: kvm: Annotate assembly using modern annoations In-Reply-To: <20200214114027.GA4827@sirena.org.uk> References: <20200213153820.32049-1-broonie@kernel.org> <20200214114027.GA4827@sirena.org.uk> Message-ID: X-Sender: maz@kernel.org User-Agent: Roundcube Webmail/1.3.10 X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 51.254.78.96 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: broonie@kernel.org, james.morse@arm.com, julien.thierry.kdev@gmail.com, suzuki.poulose@arm.com, catalin.marinas@arm.com, will@kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: maz@kernel.org X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on disco-boy.misterjones.org); SAEximRunCond expanded to false X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20200214_061924_483999_0352DCAB X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 15.74 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Suzuki K Poulose , Catalin Marinas , James Morse , Julien Thierry , Will Deacon , kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+infradead-linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On 2020-02-14 11:40, Mark Brown wrote: > On Thu, Feb 13, 2020 at 09:36:56PM +0000, Marc Zyngier wrote: >> On 2020-02-13 15:38, Mark Brown wrote: > >> > -ENTRY(__kvm_call_hyp) >> > +SYM_FUNC_START(__kvm_call_hyp) > >> I'm not convinced by this particular change. _kvm_call_hyp is called >> directly from >> C, and behaves almost like a normal function. What's the issue here? > > I'm not sure I understand your comment here - this is annotated as > SYM_FUNC_ which is the annotation for things that look like normal > C functions. You're right, apologies. I got confused between _FUNC_ and _CODE_. > >> > .align 11 >> > -ENTRY(__bp_harden_hyp_vecs_start) >> > +SYM_CODE_START_NOALIGN(__bp_harden_hyp_vecs) >> > +SYM_INNER_LABEL(__bp_harden_hyp_vecs_start, SYM_L_GLOBAL) > >> Why isn't SYM_CODE_START_NOALIGN enough? And what is the rational for > > The _start and _end labels that were there before are explicitly > referenced by code, removing them would break the build. But if we're going to clean things up, I'd rather we actually do that. The only time __bp_harden_hyp_vecs_end is used is when computing the size of the vectors, and that'd better be BP_HARDEN_EL2_SLOTS * 2kB (which can be statically asserted at compile time). > >> the _NOALIGN, btw? I'd expect an alignment of 2kB to be more than >> enough. > > So that the explicit .align above takes effect rather than anything the > macro decides to do, I'm trying to err on the side of caution here. I don't think we need this. The macros should do the right thing, and be fixed if they don't. M. -- Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny... _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel