From: Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: "Josh Poimboeuf" <jpoimboe@kernel.org>,
"Harry Wentland" <harry.wentland@amd.com>,
"Leo Li" <sunpeng.li@amd.com>,
"Alex Deucher" <alexander.deucher@amd.com>,
"Christian König" <christian.koenig@amd.com>,
"David Airlie" <airlied@gmail.com>,
"Simona Vetter" <simona@ffwll.ch>,
"Nick Desaulniers" <nick.desaulniers+lkml@gmail.com>,
"Bill Wendling" <morbo@google.com>,
"Justin Stitt" <justinstitt@google.com>,
"the arch/x86 maintainers" <x86@kernel.org>,
dri-devel <dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>,
"Linux Kernel Mailing List" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
llvm@lists.linux.dev
Subject: Re: clang and drm issue: objtool warnings from clang build
Date: Sat, 26 Apr 2025 16:05:13 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250426200513.GA427956@ax162> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAHk-=wip2-yTrWpAkrUQ0iejEo2PjReddu4xntwBvdnSvWDbzg@mail.gmail.com>
Hi Linus,
On Sat, Apr 26, 2025 at 10:42:40AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> But I *really* think that clang silently just generating known bad
> code for invalida operations like this is very very dangerous, and is
> a bug in clang.
>
> Can we *please* get a flag for clang that it doesn't just stop
> generating code because it has decided some path is unreachable or
> undefined? Add a TRAP instruction, for Chrissake! PLEASE!
>
> Maybe such a flag already exists, and the kernel just doesn't know
> about it. This whole "do random things for undefined behavior" is a
> bug, dammit.
I think there is an internal LLVM flag, '-trap-unreachable', that does
what we would want here. Within the last year, I tested adding something
like
KBUILD_CFLAGS += -mllvm -trap-unreachable
to Makefile under an 'ifdef CONFIG_CC_IS_CLANG' and it eliminated most
objtool warnings but I seem to recall it introducing some new ones, I
think around __noreturn functions? I know Josh has done a lot of work on
objtool recently so I should retest. GCC has this behavior exposed under
-funreachable-traps, I could see about trying to expose that in clang.
This specific case started with clang-20 and your analysis is spot on:
https://lore.kernel.org/20241220223403.GA2605890@ax162/
On Sat, Apr 26, 2025 at 10:52:10AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> Please people: "ASSERT()" like behavior is simply not acceptable in
> the kernel. WARN_ON() and friends need to either be otherwise benign
> (ie "warn but then continue to do valid things") or they need to be
> *handled* (ie "warn and then refuse to do things that aren't valid").
>
> Just warning and then doing random crap is not sane. If you aren't
> capable of dealing with the situation, don't do the bogus test. Just
> warning about it isn't fixing the code, and can make things actively
> worse as in these two examples.
This was the most recent series to clear up those objtool warnings in
the AMD driver:
https://lore.kernel.org/20250114132856.19463-1-yangtiezhu@loongson.cn/
Not sure if other ASSERT() uses should be audited or eliminated too but
that would at least make the build cleaner.
> Not this silent "now I generate random code by falling through to
> something else entirely" that clang does now. Not good.
Aside from what I mention above, I suppose getting OBJTOOL_WERROR in
useful shape would help with this a little bit because it will be easier
for me and others testing tip of tree LLVM to notice when optimizations
introduce new warnings.
Cheers,
Nathan
next parent reply other threads:[~2025-04-26 20:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <CAHk-=wiq=E0fwJLFpCc3wPY_9BPZF3dbdqGgVoOmK9Ykj5JEeg@mail.gmail.com>
[not found] ` <CAHk-=wip2-yTrWpAkrUQ0iejEo2PjReddu4xntwBvdnSvWDbzg@mail.gmail.com>
2025-04-26 20:05 ` Nathan Chancellor [this message]
2025-04-26 20:56 ` clang and drm issue: objtool warnings from clang build Linus Torvalds
2025-04-26 23:23 ` Nathan Chancellor
2025-04-27 0:31 ` Linus Torvalds
2025-04-28 18:08 ` Bill Wendling
2025-04-28 19:34 ` Linus Torvalds
2025-04-28 19:54 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2025-04-28 20:57 ` Linus Torvalds
2025-04-28 20:58 ` Bill Wendling
2025-04-29 9:17 ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-04-28 17:53 ` Bill Wendling
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=20250426200513.GA427956@ax162 \
--to=nathan@kernel.org \
--cc=airlied@gmail.com \
--cc=alexander.deucher@amd.com \
--cc=christian.koenig@amd.com \
--cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=harry.wentland@amd.com \
--cc=jpoimboe@kernel.org \
--cc=justinstitt@google.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=llvm@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=morbo@google.com \
--cc=nick.desaulniers+lkml@gmail.com \
--cc=simona@ffwll.ch \
--cc=sunpeng.li@amd.com \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--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