From: Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com>
To: Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>
Cc: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com>,
clang-built-linux@googlegroups.com,
Nathan Chancellor <natechancellor@gmail.com>,
linux-s390 <linux-s390@vger.kernel.org>,
Vasily Gorbik <gor@linux.ibm.com>,
Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com>,
Philipp Rudo <prudo@linux.ibm.com>,
Hendrik Brueckner <brueckner@linux.ibm.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] s390: boot, purgatory: pass $(CLANG_FLAGS) where needed
Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2019 08:32:34 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190415083234.7f05254b@mschwideX1> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAKwvOdmdUv3pOGdsJCf5HG3KGPfq8TJHY0523jPD=etJwuES7g@mail.gmail.com>
On Thu, 11 Apr 2019 11:08:31 -0700
Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 11, 2019 at 1:52 AM Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Apr 11, 2019 at 12:14 AM 'Nick Desaulniers' via Clang Built
> > Linux <clang-built-linux@googlegroups.com> wrote:
> > > On Wed, Apr 10, 2019 at 1:13 PM Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > The purgatory and boot Makefiles do not inherit the original cflags,
> > > > so clang falls back to the default target architecture when building it,
> > > > typically this would be x86 when cross-compiling.
> > > >
> > > > Add $(CLANG_FLAGS) everywhere so we pass the correct --target=s390x-linux
> > > > option when cross-compiling.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
> > > > ---
> > > > arch/s390/Makefile | 5 +++--
> > > > arch/s390/purgatory/Makefile | 1 +
> > > > 2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/arch/s390/Makefile b/arch/s390/Makefile
> > > > index 9c079a506325..443990791099 100644
> > > > --- a/arch/s390/Makefile
> > > > +++ b/arch/s390/Makefile
> > > > @@ -17,12 +17,13 @@ KBUILD_CFLAGS_MODULE += -fPIC
> > > > KBUILD_AFLAGS += -m64
> > > > KBUILD_CFLAGS += -m64
> > > > aflags_dwarf := -Wa,-gdwarf-2
> > > > -KBUILD_AFLAGS_DECOMPRESSOR := -m64 -D__ASSEMBLY__
> > > > +KBUILD_AFLAGS_DECOMPRESSOR := $(CLANG_FLAGS) -m64 -D__ASSEMBLY__
> > > > KBUILD_AFLAGS_DECOMPRESSOR += $(if $(CONFIG_DEBUG_INFO),$(aflags_dwarf))
> > > > -KBUILD_CFLAGS_DECOMPRESSOR := -m64 -O2
> > > > +KBUILD_CFLAGS_DECOMPRESSOR := $(CLANG_FLAGS) -m64 -O2
> > > > KBUILD_CFLAGS_DECOMPRESSOR += -DDISABLE_BRANCH_PROFILING -D__NO_FORTIFY
> > > > KBUILD_CFLAGS_DECOMPRESSOR += -fno-delete-null-pointer-checks -msoft-float
> > > > KBUILD_CFLAGS_DECOMPRESSOR += -fno-asynchronous-unwind-tables
> > >
> > > Thanks for the respin with Nathan's suggestion.
> > >
> > > > +KBUILD_CFLAGS_DECOMPRESSOR += $(call cc-disable-warning,pointer-sign)
> > >
> > > What's up with this ^ ? Seems like the top level sets it (without
> > > cc-disable-warning :( ), but then KBUILD_CFLAGS_DECOMPRESSOR discards
> > > it. Does Clang actually flag code in this arch (that GCC doesn't)?
> >
> > Oops, that should have been a separate patch.
> >
> > I think what happens is that clang warns more aggressively about pointer sign
> > bugs than gcc in some cases, and some of those cases happen in s390
> > header files that are included by both the kernel and the decompressor.
> >
> > The full warning log without this change is rather long, see
> > https://pastebin.com/KG9xaTNB
>
> From this link, it looks like the definitions of:
> __atomic64_or
> __atomic64_and
> __atomic64_xor
> and their *_barrier variants are problematic. I think converting
> those to use unsigned long is the way to go. Shouldn't you be doing
> bitwise ops on unsigned types anyways?
These functions follow the type of atomic64_t which is a "long" wrapped
in a structure. We do not want to change that to unsigned long, are we?
Then having some of the functions operate on "long" and others on
"unsigned long" seem odd.
> The warnings with __atomic64_add are tougher to read/understand since
> at that point the log lines look like they start to mix together.
>
> >
> > I also tried patching the code to avoid the warnings, but I'm not entirely
> > happy with that result either, see
> > https://pastebin.com/pSMz5eZA
>
> That's no terrible, IMO, particularly with the change I suggest above.
That is not too bad, the only change I do not like is the s/u8/char/ in
struct ipl_block_fcp.
--
blue skies,
Martin.
"Reality continues to ruin my life." - Calvin.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-04-15 6:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-04-10 20:12 [PATCH 1/2] s390: only build for new CPUs with clang Arnd Bergmann
2019-04-10 20:12 ` [PATCH 2/2] s390: boot, purgatory: pass $(CLANG_FLAGS) where needed Arnd Bergmann
2019-04-10 22:14 ` Nick Desaulniers
2019-04-11 8:52 ` Arnd Bergmann
2019-04-11 18:08 ` Nick Desaulniers
2019-04-15 6:32 ` Martin Schwidefsky [this message]
2019-04-10 22:20 ` [PATCH 1/2] s390: only build for new CPUs with clang Nick Desaulniers
2019-04-11 10:18 ` Arnd Bergmann
2019-04-11 17:46 ` Nick Desaulniers
2019-04-11 6:23 ` Heiko Carstens
2019-04-11 10:19 ` Arnd Bergmann
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=20190415083234.7f05254b@mschwideX1 \
--to=schwidefsky@de.ibm.com \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=brueckner@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=clang-built-linux@googlegroups.com \
--cc=gor@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=natechancellor@gmail.com \
--cc=ndesaulniers@google.com \
--cc=prudo@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=yamada.masahiro@socionext.com \
/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