| Message ID | 151520101463.32271.9320376934909324865.stgit@dwillia2-desk3.amr.corp.intel.com |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
| Series | [01/18] asm-generic/barrier: add generic nospec helpers | expand |
On 01/05/2018 05:10 PM, Dan Williams wrote: > From: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com> > > This patch implements nospec_ptr() for arm, following the recommended > architectural sequences for the arm and thumb instruction sets. > Fedora picked up the series and it fails on arm: In file included from ./include/linux/compiler.h:242:0, from ./include/uapi/linux/swab.h:6, from ./include/linux/swab.h:5, from ./arch/arm/include/asm/opcodes.h:89, from ./arch/arm/include/asm/bug.h:7, from ./include/linux/bug.h:5, from ./include/linux/mmdebug.h:5, from ./include/linux/gfp.h:5, from ./include/linux/slab.h:15, from kernel/fork.c:14: ./include/linux/fdtable.h: In function '__fcheck_files': ./arch/arm/include/asm/barrier.h:112:41: error: expected declaration specifiers or '...' before numeric constant __load_no_speculate(&__np_ptr, lo, hi, 0, __np_ptr); \ ^ ./arch/arm/include/asm/barrier.h:68:32: note: in definition of macro '__load_no_speculate_n' (typeof(*ptr)(unsigned long)(failval)); \ ^~~~~~~ ./arch/arm/include/asm/barrier.h:112:2: note: in expansion of macro '__load_no_speculate' __load_no_speculate(&__np_ptr, lo, hi, 0, __np_ptr); \ ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ./include/asm-generic/barrier.h:122:2: note: in expansion of macro 'nospec_ptr' nospec_ptr(__arr + __idx, __arr, __arr + __sz); \ ^~~~~~~~~~ ./include/linux/fdtable.h:86:13: note: in expansion of macro 'nospec_array_ptr' if ((fdp = nospec_array_ptr(fdt->fd, fd, fdt->max_fds))) ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ./arch/arm/include/asm/barrier.h:112:41: error: expected declaration specifiers or '...' before numeric constant __load_no_speculate(&__np_ptr, lo, hi, 0, __np_ptr); \ ^ ./arch/arm/include/asm/barrier.h:68:32: note: in definition of macro '__load_no_speculate_n' (typeof(*ptr)(unsigned long)(failval)); \ ^~~~~~~ ./arch/arm/include/asm/barrier.h:112:2: note: in expansion of macro '__load_no_speculate' __load_no_speculate(&__np_ptr, lo, hi, 0, __np_ptr); \ ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ./include/asm-generic/barrier.h:122:2: note: in expansion of macro 'nospec_ptr' nospec_ptr(__arr + __idx, __arr, __arr + __sz); \ ^~~~~~~~~~ ./include/linux/fdtable.h:86:13: note: in expansion of macro 'nospec_array_ptr' if ((fdp = nospec_array_ptr(fdt->fd, fd, fdt->max_fds))) ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ./arch/arm/include/asm/barrier.h:112:41: error: expected declaration specifiers or '...' before numeric constant __load_no_speculate(&__np_ptr, lo, hi, 0, __np_ptr); \ ^ ./arch/arm/include/asm/barrier.h:68:32: note: in definition of macro '__load_no_speculate_n' (typeof(*ptr)(unsigned long)(failval)); \ ^~~~~~~ ./arch/arm/include/asm/barrier.h:112:2: note: in expansion of macro '__load_no_speculate' __load_no_speculate(&__np_ptr, lo, hi, 0, __np_ptr); \ ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ./include/asm-generic/barrier.h:122:2: note: in expansion of macro 'nospec_ptr' nospec_ptr(__arr + __idx, __arr, __arr + __sz); \ ^~~~~~~~~~ ./include/linux/fdtable.h:86:13: note: in expansion of macro 'nospec_array_ptr' if ((fdp = nospec_array_ptr(fdt->fd, fd, fdt->max_fds))) I can't puzzle out what exactly is the problem here, except that it really does not seem to like that failval. Does the arm compiler not like doing the typeof with the __arr + __idx? Thanks, Laura > Signed-off-by: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com> > Signed-off-by: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com> > --- > arch/arm/include/asm/barrier.h | 75 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 75 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/arch/arm/include/asm/barrier.h b/arch/arm/include/asm/barrier.h > index 40f5c410fd8c..6384c90e4b72 100644 > --- a/arch/arm/include/asm/barrier.h > +++ b/arch/arm/include/asm/barrier.h > @@ -37,6 +37,81 @@ > #define dmb(x) __asm__ __volatile__ ("" : : : "memory") > #endif > > +#ifdef CONFIG_THUMB2_KERNEL > +#define __load_no_speculate_n(ptr, lo, hi, failval, cmpptr, sz) \ > +({ \ > + typeof(*ptr) __nln_val; \ > + typeof(*ptr) __failval = \ > + (typeof(*ptr)(unsigned long)(failval)); \ > + \ > + asm volatile ( \ > + " cmp %[c], %[l]\n" \ > + " it hs\n" \ > + " cmphs %[h], %[c]\n" \ > + " blo 1f\n" \ > + " ld" #sz " %[v], %[p]\n" \ > + "1: it lo\n" \ > + " movlo %[v], %[f]\n" \ > + " .inst 0xf3af8014 @ CSDB\n" \ > + : [v] "=&r" (__nln_val) \ > + : [p] "m" (*(ptr)), [l] "r" (lo), [h] "r" (hi), \ > + [f] "r" (__failval), [c] "r" (cmpptr) \ > + : "cc"); \ > + \ > + __nln_val; \ > +}) > +#else > +#define __load_no_speculate_n(ptr, lo, hi, failval, cmpptr, sz) \ > +({ \ > + typeof(*ptr) __nln_val; \ > + typeof(*ptr) __failval = \ > + (typeof(*ptr)(unsigned long)(failval)); \ > + \ > + asm volatile ( \ > + " cmp %[c], %[l]\n" \ > + " cmphs %[h], %[c]\n" \ > + " ldr" #sz "hi %[v], %[p]\n" \ > + " movls %[v], %[f]\n" \ > + " .inst 0xe320f014 @ CSDB\n" \ > + : [v] "=&r" (__nln_val) \ > + : [p] "m" (*(ptr)), [l] "r" (lo), [h] "r" (hi), \ > + [f] "r" (__failval), [c] "r" (cmpptr) \ > + : "cc"); \ > + \ > + __nln_val; \ > +}) > +#endif > + > +#define __load_no_speculate(ptr, lo, hi, failval, cmpptr) \ > +({ \ > + typeof(*(ptr)) __nl_val; \ > + \ > + switch (sizeof(__nl_val)) { \ > + case 1: \ > + __nl_val = __load_no_speculate_n(ptr, lo, hi, failval, \ > + cmpptr, b); \ > + break; \ > + case 2: \ > + __nl_val = __load_no_speculate_n(ptr, lo, hi, failval, \ > + cmpptr, h); \ > + break; \ > + case 4: \ > + __nl_val = __load_no_speculate_n(ptr, lo, hi, failval, \ > + cmpptr, ); \ > + break; \ > + default: \ > + BUILD_BUG(); \ > + } \ > + \ > + __nl_val; \ > +}) > + > +#define nospec_ptr(ptr, lo, hi) \ > +({ \ > + typeof(ptr) __np_ptr = (ptr); \ > + __load_no_speculate(&__np_ptr, lo, hi, 0, __np_ptr); \ > +}) > + > #ifdef CONFIG_ARM_HEAVY_MB > extern void (*soc_mb)(void); > extern void arm_heavy_mb(void); >
On 2018/1/10 10:04, Laura Abbott wrote: > On 01/05/2018 05:10 PM, Dan Williams wrote: >> From: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com> >> >> This patch implements nospec_ptr() for arm, following the recommended >> architectural sequences for the arm and thumb instruction sets. >> > Fedora picked up the series and it fails on arm: > > In file included from ./include/linux/compiler.h:242:0, > from ./include/uapi/linux/swab.h:6, > from ./include/linux/swab.h:5, > from ./arch/arm/include/asm/opcodes.h:89, > from ./arch/arm/include/asm/bug.h:7, > from ./include/linux/bug.h:5, > from ./include/linux/mmdebug.h:5, > from ./include/linux/gfp.h:5, > from ./include/linux/slab.h:15, > from kernel/fork.c:14: > ./include/linux/fdtable.h: In function '__fcheck_files': > ./arch/arm/include/asm/barrier.h:112:41: error: expected declaration specifiers or '...' before numeric constant > __load_no_speculate(&__np_ptr, lo, hi, 0, __np_ptr); \ > ^ > ./arch/arm/include/asm/barrier.h:68:32: note: in definition of macro '__load_no_speculate_n' > (typeof(*ptr)(unsigned long)(failval)); \ > ^~~~~~~ > ./arch/arm/include/asm/barrier.h:112:2: note: in expansion of macro '__load_no_speculate' > __load_no_speculate(&__np_ptr, lo, hi, 0, __np_ptr); \ > ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > ./include/asm-generic/barrier.h:122:2: note: in expansion of macro 'nospec_ptr' > nospec_ptr(__arr + __idx, __arr, __arr + __sz); \ > ^~~~~~~~~~ > ./include/linux/fdtable.h:86:13: note: in expansion of macro 'nospec_array_ptr' > if ((fdp = nospec_array_ptr(fdt->fd, fd, fdt->max_fds))) > ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > ./arch/arm/include/asm/barrier.h:112:41: error: expected declaration specifiers or '...' before numeric constant > __load_no_speculate(&__np_ptr, lo, hi, 0, __np_ptr); \ > ^ > ./arch/arm/include/asm/barrier.h:68:32: note: in definition of macro '__load_no_speculate_n' > (typeof(*ptr)(unsigned long)(failval)); \ > ^~~~~~~ > ./arch/arm/include/asm/barrier.h:112:2: note: in expansion of macro '__load_no_speculate' > __load_no_speculate(&__np_ptr, lo, hi, 0, __np_ptr); \ > ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > ./include/asm-generic/barrier.h:122:2: note: in expansion of macro 'nospec_ptr' > nospec_ptr(__arr + __idx, __arr, __arr + __sz); \ > ^~~~~~~~~~ > ./include/linux/fdtable.h:86:13: note: in expansion of macro 'nospec_array_ptr' > if ((fdp = nospec_array_ptr(fdt->fd, fd, fdt->max_fds))) > ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > ./arch/arm/include/asm/barrier.h:112:41: error: expected declaration specifiers or '...' before numeric constant > __load_no_speculate(&__np_ptr, lo, hi, 0, __np_ptr); \ > ^ > ./arch/arm/include/asm/barrier.h:68:32: note: in definition of macro '__load_no_speculate_n' > (typeof(*ptr)(unsigned long)(failval)); \ > ^~~~~~~ > ./arch/arm/include/asm/barrier.h:112:2: note: in expansion of macro '__load_no_speculate' > __load_no_speculate(&__np_ptr, lo, hi, 0, __np_ptr); \ > ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > ./include/asm-generic/barrier.h:122:2: note: in expansion of macro 'nospec_ptr' > nospec_ptr(__arr + __idx, __arr, __arr + __sz); \ > ^~~~~~~~~~ > ./include/linux/fdtable.h:86:13: note: in expansion of macro 'nospec_array_ptr' > if ((fdp = nospec_array_ptr(fdt->fd, fd, fdt->max_fds))) > > I can't puzzle out what exactly is the problem here, except that it really > does not seem to like that failval. Does the arm compiler not like doing > the typeof with the __arr + __idx? >> +#define __load_no_speculate_n(ptr, lo, hi, failval, cmpptr, sz) \ >> +({ \ >> + typeof(*ptr) __nln_val; \ >> + typeof(*ptr) __failval = \ >> + (typeof(*ptr)(unsigned long)(failval)); \ Just typo, - (typeof(*ptr)(unsigned long)(failval)); \ + (typeof(*ptr))(unsigned long)(failval); \ Please try it. Thanks Hanjun
On 01/09/2018 11:40 PM, Hanjun Guo wrote: > On 2018/1/10 10:04, Laura Abbott wrote: >> On 01/05/2018 05:10 PM, Dan Williams wrote: >>> From: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com> >>> >>> This patch implements nospec_ptr() for arm, following the recommended >>> architectural sequences for the arm and thumb instruction sets. >>> >> Fedora picked up the series and it fails on arm: >> >> In file included from ./include/linux/compiler.h:242:0, >> from ./include/uapi/linux/swab.h:6, >> from ./include/linux/swab.h:5, >> from ./arch/arm/include/asm/opcodes.h:89, >> from ./arch/arm/include/asm/bug.h:7, >> from ./include/linux/bug.h:5, >> from ./include/linux/mmdebug.h:5, >> from ./include/linux/gfp.h:5, >> from ./include/linux/slab.h:15, >> from kernel/fork.c:14: >> ./include/linux/fdtable.h: In function '__fcheck_files': >> ./arch/arm/include/asm/barrier.h:112:41: error: expected declaration specifiers or '...' before numeric constant >> __load_no_speculate(&__np_ptr, lo, hi, 0, __np_ptr); \ >> ^ >> ./arch/arm/include/asm/barrier.h:68:32: note: in definition of macro '__load_no_speculate_n' >> (typeof(*ptr)(unsigned long)(failval)); \ >> ^~~~~~~ >> ./arch/arm/include/asm/barrier.h:112:2: note: in expansion of macro '__load_no_speculate' >> __load_no_speculate(&__np_ptr, lo, hi, 0, __np_ptr); \ >> ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >> ./include/asm-generic/barrier.h:122:2: note: in expansion of macro 'nospec_ptr' >> nospec_ptr(__arr + __idx, __arr, __arr + __sz); \ >> ^~~~~~~~~~ >> ./include/linux/fdtable.h:86:13: note: in expansion of macro 'nospec_array_ptr' >> if ((fdp = nospec_array_ptr(fdt->fd, fd, fdt->max_fds))) >> ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >> ./arch/arm/include/asm/barrier.h:112:41: error: expected declaration specifiers or '...' before numeric constant >> __load_no_speculate(&__np_ptr, lo, hi, 0, __np_ptr); \ >> ^ >> ./arch/arm/include/asm/barrier.h:68:32: note: in definition of macro '__load_no_speculate_n' >> (typeof(*ptr)(unsigned long)(failval)); \ >> ^~~~~~~ >> ./arch/arm/include/asm/barrier.h:112:2: note: in expansion of macro '__load_no_speculate' >> __load_no_speculate(&__np_ptr, lo, hi, 0, __np_ptr); \ >> ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >> ./include/asm-generic/barrier.h:122:2: note: in expansion of macro 'nospec_ptr' >> nospec_ptr(__arr + __idx, __arr, __arr + __sz); \ >> ^~~~~~~~~~ >> ./include/linux/fdtable.h:86:13: note: in expansion of macro 'nospec_array_ptr' >> if ((fdp = nospec_array_ptr(fdt->fd, fd, fdt->max_fds))) >> ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >> ./arch/arm/include/asm/barrier.h:112:41: error: expected declaration specifiers or '...' before numeric constant >> __load_no_speculate(&__np_ptr, lo, hi, 0, __np_ptr); \ >> ^ >> ./arch/arm/include/asm/barrier.h:68:32: note: in definition of macro '__load_no_speculate_n' >> (typeof(*ptr)(unsigned long)(failval)); \ >> ^~~~~~~ >> ./arch/arm/include/asm/barrier.h:112:2: note: in expansion of macro '__load_no_speculate' >> __load_no_speculate(&__np_ptr, lo, hi, 0, __np_ptr); \ >> ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >> ./include/asm-generic/barrier.h:122:2: note: in expansion of macro 'nospec_ptr' >> nospec_ptr(__arr + __idx, __arr, __arr + __sz); \ >> ^~~~~~~~~~ >> ./include/linux/fdtable.h:86:13: note: in expansion of macro 'nospec_array_ptr' >> if ((fdp = nospec_array_ptr(fdt->fd, fd, fdt->max_fds))) >> >> I can't puzzle out what exactly is the problem here, except that it really >> does not seem to like that failval. Does the arm compiler not like doing >> the typeof with the __arr + __idx? > >>> +#define __load_no_speculate_n(ptr, lo, hi, failval, cmpptr, sz) \ >>> +({ \ >>> + typeof(*ptr) __nln_val; \ >>> + typeof(*ptr) __failval = \ >>> + (typeof(*ptr)(unsigned long)(failval)); \ > > Just typo, > > - (typeof(*ptr)(unsigned long)(failval)); \ > + (typeof(*ptr))(unsigned long)(failval); \ > > Please try it. > > Thanks > Hanjun > Ah yeah, that's exactly it. I really missed the obvious. Thanks, Laura
diff --git a/arch/arm/include/asm/barrier.h b/arch/arm/include/asm/barrier.h index 40f5c410fd8c..6384c90e4b72 100644 --- a/arch/arm/include/asm/barrier.h +++ b/arch/arm/include/asm/barrier.h @@ -37,6 +37,81 @@ #define dmb(x) __asm__ __volatile__ ("" : : : "memory") #endif +#ifdef CONFIG_THUMB2_KERNEL +#define __load_no_speculate_n(ptr, lo, hi, failval, cmpptr, sz) \ +({ \ + typeof(*ptr) __nln_val; \ + typeof(*ptr) __failval = \ + (typeof(*ptr)(unsigned long)(failval)); \ + \ + asm volatile ( \ + " cmp %[c], %[l]\n" \ + " it hs\n" \ + " cmphs %[h], %[c]\n" \ + " blo 1f\n" \ + " ld" #sz " %[v], %[p]\n" \ + "1: it lo\n" \ + " movlo %[v], %[f]\n" \ + " .inst 0xf3af8014 @ CSDB\n" \ + : [v] "=&r" (__nln_val) \ + : [p] "m" (*(ptr)), [l] "r" (lo), [h] "r" (hi), \ + [f] "r" (__failval), [c] "r" (cmpptr) \ + : "cc"); \ + \ + __nln_val; \ +}) +#else +#define __load_no_speculate_n(ptr, lo, hi, failval, cmpptr, sz) \ +({ \ + typeof(*ptr) __nln_val; \ + typeof(*ptr) __failval = \ + (typeof(*ptr)(unsigned long)(failval)); \ + \ + asm volatile ( \ + " cmp %[c], %[l]\n" \ + " cmphs %[h], %[c]\n" \ + " ldr" #sz "hi %[v], %[p]\n" \ + " movls %[v], %[f]\n" \ + " .inst 0xe320f014 @ CSDB\n" \ + : [v] "=&r" (__nln_val) \ + : [p] "m" (*(ptr)), [l] "r" (lo), [h] "r" (hi), \ + [f] "r" (__failval), [c] "r" (cmpptr) \ + : "cc"); \ + \ + __nln_val; \ +}) +#endif + +#define __load_no_speculate(ptr, lo, hi, failval, cmpptr) \ +({ \ + typeof(*(ptr)) __nl_val; \ + \ + switch (sizeof(__nl_val)) { \ + case 1: \ + __nl_val = __load_no_speculate_n(ptr, lo, hi, failval, \ + cmpptr, b); \ + break; \ + case 2: \ + __nl_val = __load_no_speculate_n(ptr, lo, hi, failval, \ + cmpptr, h); \ + break; \ + case 4: \ + __nl_val = __load_no_speculate_n(ptr, lo, hi, failval, \ + cmpptr, ); \ + break; \ + default: \ + BUILD_BUG(); \ + } \ + \ + __nl_val; \ +}) + +#define nospec_ptr(ptr, lo, hi) \ +({ \ + typeof(ptr) __np_ptr = (ptr); \ + __load_no_speculate(&__np_ptr, lo, hi, 0, __np_ptr); \ +}) + #ifdef CONFIG_ARM_HEAVY_MB extern void (*soc_mb)(void); extern void arm_heavy_mb(void);