From: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
To: Jeremy Linton <jeremy.linton@arm.com>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org, ardb@kernel.org, will@kernel.org,
catalin.marinas@arm.com, davem@davemloft.net,
herbert@gondor.apana.org.au, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [BUG][PATCH] arm64: bti: fix BTI to handle local indirect branches
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2020 21:28:40 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20201005202840.GJ5139@sirena.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <c554e7cb-2773-a49f-a126-fdc56be029ca@arm.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 814 bytes --]
On Mon, Oct 05, 2020 at 03:10:42PM -0500, Jeremy Linton wrote:
> On 10/5/20 2:59 PM, Mark Brown wrote:
> > ...this is going to cause problems, SYM_CODE means that we should
> > assemble *exactly* what was written since it's some non-standard thing -
> > we use it for the vectors table for example. Looking at the code it's
> > not 100% clear that the best approach here isn't just to change the call
> > to a regular function call, this isn't a fast path or anything as far as
> > I can see so it's unclear to me why we need to tail call.
> Well for some workloads its could be AFAIK. OTOH, Ard mentioned dumping the
> tail call too, and I think that is pretty reasonable. So it looks like that
> is a better plan since it also avoids all this SYM_ flailing.
Yeah, I think that's the easiest thing all round.
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-10-05 20:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-10-05 18:18 [BUG][PATCH] arm64: bti: fix BTI to handle local indirect branches Jeremy Linton
2020-10-05 18:54 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2020-10-05 19:24 ` Jeremy Linton
2020-10-06 9:38 ` Dave Martin
2020-10-06 9:50 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2020-10-05 19:59 ` Mark Brown
2020-10-05 20:10 ` Jeremy Linton
2020-10-05 20:28 ` Mark Brown [this message]
2020-10-06 7:23 ` kernel test robot
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=20201005202840.GJ5139@sirena.org.uk \
--to=broonie@kernel.org \
--cc=ardb@kernel.org \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=herbert@gondor.apana.org.au \
--cc=jeremy.linton@arm.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.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