From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
To: hpa@zytor.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, dwmw2@infradead.org,
keescook@chromium.org, tglx@linutronix.de, hpa@linux.intel.com,
David.Woodhouse@intel.com
Cc: linux-tip-commits@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [tip:x86/build] x86, boot: Fix word-size assumptions in has_eflag () inline asm
Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2014 10:09:02 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140130090902.GA2749@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <tip-9b3614ccfa5492f57f743f3856253f285b10a702@git.kernel.org>
* tip-bot for David Woodhouse <tipbot@zytor.com> wrote:
> Commit-ID: 9b3614ccfa5492f57f743f3856253f285b10a702
> Gitweb: http://git.kernel.org/tip/9b3614ccfa5492f57f743f3856253f285b10a702
> Author: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>
> AuthorDate: Wed, 29 Jan 2014 12:01:37 +0000
> Committer: H. Peter Anvin <hpa@linux.intel.com>
> CommitDate: Wed, 29 Jan 2014 09:09:40 -0800
>
> x86, boot: Fix word-size assumptions in has_eflag() inline asm
>
> Commit dd78b97367bd575918204cc89107c1479d3fc1a7 ("x86, boot: Move CPU
> flags out of cpucheck") introduced ambiguous inline asm in the
> has_eflag() function. We want the instruction to be 'pushfl', but we
> just say 'pushf' and hope the compiler does what we wanted.
>
> When building with 'clang -m16', it won't, because clang doesn't use
> the horrid '.code16gcc' hack that even 'gcc -m16' uses internally.
>
> Say what we mean and don't make the compiler make assumptions.
>
> [ hpa: we use plain "pushf" in the equivalent code elsewhere which may
> be compiled as either 32- or 64-bit code. In those cases we want
> the assembler to pick the appropriate size for us. However, this is
> *16-bit* code and we still need these to be 32-bit operations. ]
>
> Signed-off-by: David Woodhouse <David.Woodhouse@intel.com>
> Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1390996897.20153.123.camel@i7.infradead.org
> Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
> Signed-off-by: H. Peter Anvin <hpa@linux.intel.com>
> ---
> arch/x86/boot/cpuflags.c | 10 +++++-----
> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/boot/cpuflags.c b/arch/x86/boot/cpuflags.c
> index a9fcb7c..168dd25 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/boot/cpuflags.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/boot/cpuflags.c
> @@ -32,16 +32,16 @@ int has_eflag(unsigned long mask)
> {
> unsigned long f0, f1;
>
> - asm volatile("pushf \n\t"
> - "pushf \n\t"
> + asm volatile("pushfl \n\t"
> + "pushfl \n\t"
> "pop %0 \n\t"
> "mov %0,%1 \n\t"
> "xor %2,%1 \n\t"
> "push %1 \n\t"
> - "popf \n\t"
> - "pushf \n\t"
> + "popfl \n\t"
> + "pushfl \n\t"
> "pop %1 \n\t"
> - "popf"
> + "popfl"
> : "=&r" (f0), "=&r" (f1)
> : "ri" (mask));
This broke the build though:
arch/x86/boot/compressed/../cpuflags.c: Assembler messages:
arch/x86/boot/compressed/../cpuflags.c:35: Error: invalid instruction suffix for `pushf'
Thanks,
Ingo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-01-30 9:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-10-03 20:53 [PATCH v7 0/7] Kernel base address randomization on x86 Kees Cook
2013-10-03 20:53 ` [PATCH 1/7] x86, boot: move CPU flags out of cpucheck Kees Cook
2014-01-29 12:01 ` [PATCH] x86, boot: fix word-size assumptions in has_eflag() inline asm David Woodhouse
2014-01-29 16:57 ` Kees Cook
2014-01-29 17:13 ` [tip:x86/build] x86, boot: Fix word-size assumptions in has_eflag () " tip-bot for David Woodhouse
2014-01-30 9:09 ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2014-01-30 10:28 ` Woodhouse, David
2014-01-30 11:00 ` [PATCH v2] " David Woodhouse
2014-01-30 13:45 ` H. Peter Anvin
2014-01-30 14:08 ` David Woodhouse
2014-01-30 16:10 ` [tip:x86/build] " tip-bot for David Woodhouse
2014-01-30 23:01 ` [PATCH v2] " David Rientjes
2013-10-03 20:53 ` [PATCH 2/7] x86, kaslr: return location from decompress_kernel Kees Cook
2013-10-03 20:53 ` [PATCH 3/7] x86, kaslr: find minimum safe relocation position Kees Cook
2013-10-03 22:23 ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-10-03 22:43 ` Kees Cook
2013-10-03 22:46 ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-10-03 20:53 ` [PATCH 4/7] x86, kaslr: select random base offset Kees Cook
2013-10-03 20:53 ` [PATCH 5/7] x86, kaslr: select memory region from e820 maps Kees Cook
2013-10-03 20:53 ` [PATCH 6/7] x86, kaslr: report kernel offset on panic Kees Cook
2013-10-03 20:53 ` [PATCH 7/7] x86, kaslr: raise max positions to 1GiB on x86_64 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=20140130090902.GA2749@gmail.com \
--to=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=David.Woodhouse@intel.com \
--cc=dwmw2@infradead.org \
--cc=hpa@linux.intel.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-tip-commits@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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).