From: Robert Jarzmik <robert.jarzmik@free.fr>
To: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>
Cc: Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@arm.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: fix alignement of __bug_table section entries
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2015 22:53:43 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <8737ymuhbc.fsf@belgarion.home> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 20150910191652.GJ21084@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk
Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@arm.linux.org.uk> writes:
> I've been wondering whether we can teach GCC that set_domain modifies
> the value that get_domain returns, rather than throwing a volatile
> onto the asm in get_domain. The issue with a volatile there is that
> even if the result is unused, but the code is reachable, gcc still has
> to output the code to read the register.
>
> We might be able to get away with a memory clobber on the set_domain,
> and fake a memory read in get_domain, eg, by passing
> "m" (current_thread_info()->cpu_domain))
> to the get_domain asm.
Ok, let's say we do it that way.
I have some concerns about it:
(a) I see an inbalance, as set_domain() doesn't actually modify
current_thread_info()->cpu_domain. I don't see how it will protect use
from this scenario :
- get_domain()
- set_domain()
- set_domain()
(b) domain.h is included from thread_info.h, not the other way around
=> current_thread_info() is not accessible from domain.h
=> that would require a bit of moving things around, as thread_info
structure description should be available for example.
This is currently my biggest problem with this approach.
(c) I was also wondering if a case like this could happen :
- a function foo() does a get_domain()
=> an exception/irq whatever happens and modifies the DACR
- foo() continues a makes a modify_domain()
=> and here the modify_domain() uses the old DACR value
Or said differently, I wonder if there is a case of 2 get_domain() calls
in a row with a DACR modification in between. I
What about something such as [1], without a memory clobber, but a "fake" memory
variable link ?
Cheers.
--
Robert
[1] get_domain() / set_domain() link
diff --git a/arch/arm/include/asm/domain.h b/arch/arm/include/asm/domain.h
index e878129f2fee..fc1d9c43aa08 100644
--- a/arch/arm/include/asm/domain.h
+++ b/arch/arm/include/asm/domain.h
@@ -83,13 +83,17 @@
#ifndef __ASSEMBLY__
+static int domain_barrier;
+/*
+ * how to get the current stack pointer in C
+ */
static inline unsigned int get_domain(void)
{
unsigned int domain;
asm(
"mrc p15, 0, %0, c3, c0 @ get domain"
- : "=r" (domain));
+ : "=r" (domain), "=m" (domain_barrier));
return domain;
}
@@ -97,8 +101,8 @@ static inline unsigned int get_domain(void)
static inline void set_domain(unsigned val)
{
asm volatile(
- "mcr p15, 0, %0, c3, c0 @ set domain"
- : : "r" (val));
+ "mcr p15, 0, %1, c3, c0 @ set domain"
+ : "=m" (domain_barrier) : "r" (val));
isb();
}
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-09-10 20:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-09-02 6:23 [PATCH] ARM: fix alignement of __bug_table section entries Robert Jarzmik
2015-09-02 10:39 ` Dave Martin
2015-09-05 13:48 ` Robert Jarzmik
2015-09-05 14:25 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2015-09-05 17:10 ` Robert Jarzmik
2015-09-05 20:38 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2015-09-05 22:12 ` Robert Jarzmik
2015-09-06 17:25 ` Robert Jarzmik
2015-09-06 19:48 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2015-09-06 21:31 ` Robert Jarzmik
2015-09-06 23:54 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2015-09-08 17:01 ` Robert Jarzmik
2015-09-08 20:08 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2015-09-08 20:46 ` Robert Jarzmik
2015-09-09 23:06 ` Robert Jarzmik
2015-09-10 19:01 ` Robert Jarzmik
2015-09-10 19:16 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2015-09-10 20:53 ` Robert Jarzmik [this message]
2015-09-11 9:54 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2015-09-11 9:56 ` [PATCH 1/2] ARM: domains: thread_info.h no longer needs asm/domains.h Russell King
2015-09-11 9:56 ` [PATCH 2/2] ARM: domains: add memory dependencies to get_domain/set_domain Russell King
2015-09-11 14:56 ` Robert Jarzmik
2015-09-11 15:10 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2015-09-11 15:40 ` Robert Jarzmik
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=8737ymuhbc.fsf@belgarion.home \
--to=robert.jarzmik@free.fr \
--cc=Dave.Martin@arm.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@arm.linux.org.uk \
/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