From: John Paul Adrian Glaubitz <glaubitz@physik.fu-berlin.de>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@kernel.org>,
Yoshinori Sato <ysato@users.sourceforge.jp>,
Rich Felker <dalias@libc.org>
Cc: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
linux-sh@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sh: use generic uaccess
Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2024 14:55:35 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1ab7594855718e24ddc629ebbab1edc8bdcd799a.camel@physik.fu-berlin.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240123132335.2034611-1-arnd@kernel.org>
Hi Arnd,
On Tue, 2024-01-23 at 14:23 +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
>
> As reported by many people, the nommu SH code runs into a compiler error
> with a newly added syscall:
>
> + {standard input}: Error: displacement to undefined symbol .L105 overflows 8-bit field : => 590, 593
> + {standard input}: Error: displacement to undefined symbol .L135 overflows 8-bit field : => 603
> + {standard input}: Error: displacement to undefined symbol .L140 overflows 8-bit field : => 606
> + {standard input}: Error: displacement to undefined symbol .L76 overflows 12-bit field: => 591, 594
> + {standard input}: Error: displacement to undefined symbol .L77 overflows 8-bit field : 607 => 607, 582, 585
> + {standard input}: Error: displacement to undefined symbol .L97 overflows 12-bit field: => 607
> + {standard input}: Error: pcrel too far: 604, 590, 577, 593, 572, 569, 598, 599, 596, 610 => 610, 574, 599, 569, 598, 596, 601, 590, 604, 595, 572, 577, 593
>
> Avoid the code that triggers this entirely by using the same generic
> uaccess code that m68k and riscv have on nommu.
>
> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/07d8877b-d933-46f4-8ca4-c10ed602f37e@app.fastmail.com/
> Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
> ---
> arch/sh/include/asm/uaccess.h | 5 +++++
> arch/sh/include/asm/uaccess_32.h | 23 -----------------------
> 2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/sh/include/asm/uaccess.h b/arch/sh/include/asm/uaccess.h
> index a79609eb14be..b42764d55901 100644
> --- a/arch/sh/include/asm/uaccess.h
> +++ b/arch/sh/include/asm/uaccess.h
> @@ -2,6 +2,7 @@
> #ifndef __ASM_SH_UACCESS_H
> #define __ASM_SH_UACCESS_H
>
> +#ifdef CONFIG_MMU
> #include <asm/extable.h>
> #include <asm-generic/access_ok.h>
>
> @@ -130,4 +131,8 @@ struct mem_access {
> int handle_unaligned_access(insn_size_t instruction, struct pt_regs *regs,
> struct mem_access *ma, int, unsigned long address);
>
> +#else
> +#include <asm-generic/uaccess.h>
> +#endif
> +
> #endif /* __ASM_SH_UACCESS_H */
> diff --git a/arch/sh/include/asm/uaccess_32.h b/arch/sh/include/asm/uaccess_32.h
> index 5d7ddc092afd..e053f2fd245c 100644
> --- a/arch/sh/include/asm/uaccess_32.h
> +++ b/arch/sh/include/asm/uaccess_32.h
> @@ -35,7 +35,6 @@ do { \
> } \
> } while (0)
>
> -#ifdef CONFIG_MMU
> #define __get_user_asm(x, addr, err, insn) \
> ({ \
> __asm__ __volatile__( \
> @@ -56,16 +55,6 @@ __asm__ __volatile__( \
> ".previous" \
> :"=&r" (err), "=&r" (x) \
> :"m" (__m(addr)), "i" (-EFAULT), "0" (err)); })
> -#else
> -#define __get_user_asm(x, addr, err, insn) \
> -do { \
> - __asm__ __volatile__ ( \
> - "mov." insn " %1, %0\n\t" \
> - : "=&r" (x) \
> - : "m" (__m(addr)) \
> - ); \
> -} while (0)
> -#endif /* CONFIG_MMU */
>
> extern void __get_user_unknown(void);
>
> @@ -140,7 +129,6 @@ do { \
> } \
> } while (0)
>
> -#ifdef CONFIG_MMU
> #define __put_user_asm(x, addr, err, insn) \
> do { \
> __asm__ __volatile__ ( \
> @@ -164,17 +152,6 @@ do { \
> : "memory" \
> ); \
> } while (0)
> -#else
> -#define __put_user_asm(x, addr, err, insn) \
> -do { \
> - __asm__ __volatile__ ( \
> - "mov." insn " %0, %1\n\t" \
> - : /* no outputs */ \
> - : "r" (x), "m" (__m(addr)) \
> - : "memory" \
> - ); \
> -} while (0)
> -#endif /* CONFIG_MMU */
>
> #if defined(CONFIG_CPU_LITTLE_ENDIAN)
> #define __put_user_u64(val,addr,retval) \
Wouldn't that make these operations slower or do you think that GCC is able
to optimize this well enough?
Also, this is something that should definitely be boot-tested to make sure
this doesn't introduce any regressions.
Adrian
--
.''`. John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' : Debian Developer
`. `' Physicist
`- GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546 0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-01-23 13:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-01-23 13:23 Arnd Bergmann
2024-01-23 13:55 ` John Paul Adrian Glaubitz [this message]
2024-01-23 14:14 ` Arnd Bergmann
2024-01-23 14:18 ` John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
2024-01-23 16:35 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
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=1ab7594855718e24ddc629ebbab1edc8bdcd799a.camel@physik.fu-berlin.de \
--to=glaubitz@physik.fu-berlin.de \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=arnd@kernel.org \
--cc=dalias@libc.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-sh@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ysato@users.sourceforge.jp \
/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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®