linuxppc-dev.lists.ozlabs.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Segher Boessenkool <segher@kernel.crashing.org>
To: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@c-s.fr>
Cc: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] powerpc: use __builtin_trap() in BUG/WARN macros.
Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2019 10:45:31 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190819154531.GM31406@gate.crashing.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <44a19633-f2a9-79f9-da7c-16ba64a66600@c-s.fr>

On Mon, Aug 19, 2019 at 05:05:46PM +0200, Christophe Leroy wrote:
> Le 19/08/2019 à 16:37, Segher Boessenkool a écrit :
> >On Mon, Aug 19, 2019 at 04:08:43PM +0200, Christophe Leroy wrote:
> >>Le 19/08/2019 à 15:23, Segher Boessenkool a écrit :
> >>>On Mon, Aug 19, 2019 at 01:06:31PM +0000, Christophe Leroy wrote:
> >>>>Note that we keep using an assembly text using "twi 31, 0, 0" for
> >>>>inconditional traps because GCC drops all code after
> >>>>__builtin_trap() when the condition is always true at build time.
> >>>
> >>>As I said, it can also do this for conditional traps, if it can prove
> >>>the condition is always true.
> >>
> >>But we have another branch for 'always true' and 'always false' using
> >>__builtin_constant_p(), which don't use __builtin_trap(). Is there
> >>anything wrong with that ?:
> >
> >The compiler might not realise it is constant when it evaluates the
> >__builtin_constant_p, but only realises it later.  As the documentation
> >for the builtin says:
> >   A return of 0 does not indicate that the
> >   value is _not_ a constant, but merely that GCC cannot prove it is a
> >   constant with the specified value of the '-O' option.
> 
> So you mean GCC would not be able to prove that 
> __builtin_constant_p(cond) is always true but it would be able to prove 
> that if (cond)  is always true ?

Not sure what you mean, sorry.

> And isn't there a away to tell GCC that '__builtin_trap()' is 
> recoverable in our case ?

No, GCC knows that a trap will never fall through.

> >I think it may work if you do
> >
> >#define BUG_ON(x) do {						\
> >	if (__builtin_constant_p(x)) {				\
> >		if (x)						\
> >			BUG();					\
> >	} else {						\
> >		BUG_ENTRY("", 0);				\
> >		if (x)						\
> >			__builtin_trap();			\
> >	}							\
> >} while (0)
> 
> It doesn't work:

You need to make a BUG_ENTRY so that it refers to the *following* trap
instruction, if you go this way.

> >I don't know how BUG_ENTRY works exactly.
> 
> It's basic, maybe too basic: it adds an inline asm with a label, and 
> adds a .long in the __bug_table section with the address of that label.
> 
> When putting it after the __builtin_trap(), I changed it to using the 
> address before the one of the label which is always the twxx instruction 
> as far as I can see.
> 
> #define BUG_ENTRY(insn, flags, ...)			\
> 	__asm__ __volatile__(				\
> 		"1:	" insn "\n"			\
> 		".section __bug_table,\"aw\"\n"		\
> 		"2:\t" PPC_LONG "1b, %0\n"		\
> 		"\t.short %1, %2\n"			\
> 		".org 2b+%3\n"				\
> 		".previous\n"				\
> 		: : "i" (__FILE__), "i" (__LINE__),	\
> 		  "i" (flags),				\
> 		  "i" (sizeof(struct bug_entry)),	\
> 		  ##__VA_ARGS__)

#define MY_BUG_ENTRY(lab, flags)			\
	__asm__ __volatile__(				\
		".section __bug_table,\"aw\"\n"		\
		"2:\t" PPC_LONG "%4, %0\n"		\
		"\t.short %1, %2\n"			\
		".org 2b+%3\n"				\
		".previous\n"				\
		: : "i" (__FILE__), "i" (__LINE__),	\
		  "i" (flags),				\
		  "i" (sizeof(struct bug_entry)),	\
		  "i" (lab))

called as

#define BUG_ON(x) do {						\
	MY_BUG_ENTRY(&&lab, 0);					\
	lab: if (x)						\
		__builtin_trap();				\
} while (0)

not sure how reliable that works -- *if* it works, I just typed that in
without testing or anything -- but hopefully you get the idea.


Segher

  reply	other threads:[~2019-08-19 15:49 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-08-19 13:06 [PATCH 1/3] powerpc: don't use __WARN() for WARN_ON() Christophe Leroy
2019-08-19 13:06 ` [PATCH 2/3] powerpc: refactoring BUG/WARN macros Christophe Leroy
2019-11-25 10:46   ` Michael Ellerman
2019-08-19 13:06 ` [PATCH 3/3] powerpc: use __builtin_trap() in " Christophe Leroy
2019-08-19 13:23   ` Segher Boessenkool
2019-08-19 14:08     ` Christophe Leroy
2019-08-19 14:37       ` Segher Boessenkool
2019-08-19 15:05         ` Christophe Leroy
2019-08-19 15:45           ` Segher Boessenkool [this message]
2019-08-23 15:35             ` Christophe Leroy
2019-08-19 16:28 ` [PATCH 1/3] powerpc: don't use __WARN() for WARN_ON() Kees Cook
2019-08-19 17:29   ` Clean up cut-here even harder (was Re: [PATCH 1/3] powerpc: don't use __WARN() for WARN_ON()) Kees Cook

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=20190819154531.GM31406@gate.crashing.org \
    --to=segher@kernel.crashing.org \
    --cc=christophe.leroy@c-s.fr \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
    --cc=paulus@samba.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).