public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>
Cc: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>,
	Shinichiro Kawasaki <shinichiro.kawasaki@wdc.com>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com>,
	Damien Le Moal <Damien.LeMoal@wdc.com>,
	jgross@suse.com, x86@kernel.org
Subject: Re: WARNING: can't access registers at asm_common_interrupt
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2020 21:07:30 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20201111200730.GM2628@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20201111195900.2x7kfce2ejkmrzi3@treble>

On Wed, Nov 11, 2020 at 01:59:00PM -0600, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 11, 2020 at 08:42:06PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > Would objtool have an easier time coping if this were implemented in
> > > terms of a static call?
> > 
> > I doubt it, the big problem is that there is no visibility into the
> > actual alternative text. Runtime patching fragments into static call
> > would have the exact same problem.
> > 
> > Something that _might_ maybe work is trying to morph the immediate
> > fragments into an alternative. That is, instead of this:
> > 
> > static inline notrace unsigned long arch_local_save_flags(void)
> > {
> > 	return PVOP_CALLEE0(unsigned long, irq.save_fl);
> > }
> > 
> > Write it something like:
> > 
> > static inline notrace unsigned long arch_local_save_flags(void)
> > {
> > 	PVOP_CALL_ARGS;
> > 	PVOP_TEST_NULL(irq.save_fl);
> > 	asm_inline volatile(ALTERNATIVE(paravirt_alt(PARAVIRT_CALL),
> > 					"PUSHF; POP _ASM_AX",
> > 					X86_FEATURE_NATIVE)
> > 			    : CLBR_RET_REG, ASM_CALL_CONSTRAINT
> > 			    : paravirt_type(irq.save_fl.func),
> > 			      paravirt_clobber(PVOP_CALLEE_CLOBBERS)
> > 			    : "memory", "cc");
> > 	return __eax;
> > }
> > 
> > And then we have to teach objtool how to deal with conflicting
> > alternatives...
> > 
> > That would remove most (all, if we can figure out a form that deals with
> > the spinlock fragments) of paravirt_patch.c
> > 
> > Hmm?
> 
> I was going to suggest something similar.  Though I would try to take it
> further and replace paravirt_patch_default() with static calls.

Possible, we just need to be _really_ careful to not allow changing
those static_call()s. So maybe we need DEFINE_STATIC_CALL_RO() which
does a __ro_after_init on the whole thing.

> Either way it doesn't make objtool's job much easier.  But it would be
> nice to consolidate runtime patching mechanisms and get rid of
> .parainstructions.

I think the above (combining alternative and paravirt/static_call) does
make objtool's job easier, since then we at least have the actual
alternative instructions available to inspect, or am I mis-understanding
things?

  reply	other threads:[~2020-11-11 20:07 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-11-06  6:04 WARNING: can't access registers at asm_common_interrupt Shinichiro Kawasaki
2020-11-06 18:06 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2020-11-09  9:10   ` Shinichiro Kawasaki
2020-11-10  3:19     ` Josh Poimboeuf
2020-11-10  9:19       ` Shinichiro Kawasaki
2020-11-11 17:05 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2020-11-11 17:47   ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-11-11 18:13     ` Josh Poimboeuf
2020-11-11 18:46       ` Andrew Cooper
2020-11-11 19:42         ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-11-11 19:59           ` Josh Poimboeuf
2020-11-11 20:07             ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2020-11-11 20:15               ` Josh Poimboeuf
2020-11-11 20:25                 ` Andrew Cooper
2020-11-11 20:39                   ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-11-13 17:34                   ` Andy Lutomirski
2020-11-14  9:16                     ` Jürgen Groß
2020-11-14 18:10                       ` Andy Lutomirski
2020-11-15  6:33                         ` Jürgen Groß
2020-11-15 16:05                           ` Andy Lutomirski
2020-11-15 16:13                             ` Jürgen Groß
2020-11-16 11:56                     ` Jürgen Groß
2020-11-16 13:04                       ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-11-18  6:47                         ` Jürgen Groß
2020-11-18  8:22                           ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-11-19 11:51                             ` Shinichiro Kawasaki
2020-11-19 12:01                               ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-11-19 12:28                                 ` Jürgen Groß
2020-11-19 12:48                                 ` Shinichiro Kawasaki
2020-11-11 20:35                 ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-11-11 20:42       ` Peter Zijlstra
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2020-09-06 20:46 syzbot

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=20201111200730.GM2628@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net \
    --to=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=Damien.LeMoal@wdc.com \
    --cc=andrew.cooper3@citrix.com \
    --cc=jgross@suse.com \
    --cc=jpoimboe@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=npiggin@gmail.com \
    --cc=shinichiro.kawasaki@wdc.com \
    --cc=x86@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