From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
To: Roland McGrath <roland@redhat.com>
Cc: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@novell.com>,
heukelum@fastmail.fm, Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Alexander van Heukelum <heukelum@mailshack.com>,
Glauber Costa <gcosta@redhat.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC,v2] x86_64: save_args out of line
Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2008 11:34:15 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20081119103415.GA16516@elte.hu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20081118225336.60FFA1544EB@magilla.localdomain>
* Roland McGrath <roland@redhat.com> wrote:
> > but that's the exception. Most of the annotations could be
> > auto-generated.
>
> Not really. An implicit .cfi_undefined can be auto-generated for an
> unannotated instruction with an output register. An implicit
> .cfi_register can be auto-generated for an unannotated
> register-to-register move. An implicit .cfi_same_value can be
> auto-generated when you can tell a register is being written with
> the register or stack slot tha the current CFI state says holds the
> caller's value of that register. Beyond that, it gets into either
> assumptions or hairy analysis of how stack slots are being used and
> so forth.
i dont buy that argument at all.
Yes, of course full "no changes to the current code at all" automation
is hard.
But _at minimum_ GAS should automate a large part of this and help us
out syntactically: make it really easy to human-annotate instructions
in a _minimal way_. Also, automate the easy bits while at it. Plus
warn about missing annotations - nesting errors, etc. etc.
there's a ton of easy things GAS could do here that it does not do.
> [...] Explicit (but simple) macros in the assembly is what I favor.
Yeah. This is the second-best option - but has some limitations. Still
it is much better than what we have now.
What _clearly_ sucks is the current mess of:
CFI_ADJUST_CFA_OFFSET 8
/*CFI_REL_OFFSET ss,0*/
pushq %rax /* rsp */
CFI_ADJUST_CFA_OFFSET 8
CFI_REL_OFFSET rsp,0
pushq $(1<<9) /* eflags - interrupts on */
CFI_ADJUST_CFA_OFFSET 8
/*CFI_REL_OFFSET rflags,0*/
pushq $__KERNEL_CS /* cs */
CFI_ADJUST_CFA_OFFSET 8
/*CFI_REL_OFFSET cs,0*/
pushq \child_rip /* rip */
CFI_ADJUST_CFA_OFFSET 8
CFI_REL_OFFSET rip,0
pushq %rax /* orig rax */
CFI_ADJUST_CFA_OFFSET 8
Compared to what we could have (stupid mockup):
pushq_cf1 %rax /* rsp */
pushq_cf1 $(1<<9) /* eflags - interrupts on */
pushq_cf1 $__KERNEL_CS /* cs */
pushq_cf2 \child_rip /* rip */
pushq_cf1 %rax /* orig rax */
Whoever claims that this cannot be automated in _large_ part isnt
thinking it through really. Those CFI annotations should never have
been added in this form.
Ingo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-11-19 10:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 75+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-11-16 14:29 [PATCH] trivial, entry_64: remove whitespace at end of lines Alexander van Heukelum
2008-11-16 14:29 ` [RFC] x86: save_args out of line Alexander van Heukelum
2008-11-17 12:14 ` Glauber Costa
2008-11-17 15:13 ` Alexander van Heukelum
2008-11-17 12:53 ` Andi Kleen
2008-11-17 15:37 ` Alexander van Heukelum
2008-11-17 18:23 ` Andi Kleen
2008-11-17 19:22 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2008-11-17 19:29 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2008-11-17 19:49 ` Alexander van Heukelum
2008-11-17 19:54 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2008-11-17 19:43 ` Alexander van Heukelum
2008-11-17 19:49 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2008-11-17 17:52 ` [RFC,v2] x86_64: " Alexander van Heukelum
2008-11-18 8:09 ` Jan Beulich
2008-11-18 11:16 ` Alexander van Heukelum
2008-11-18 12:51 ` Jan Beulich
2008-11-18 14:03 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-11-18 14:52 ` Jan Beulich
2008-11-18 15:00 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-11-18 22:53 ` Roland McGrath
2008-11-18 23:35 ` Andi Kleen
2008-11-18 23:36 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2008-11-18 23:44 ` H. Peter Anvin
2008-11-19 0:08 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2008-11-18 23:45 ` Roland McGrath
2008-11-19 0:06 ` Andi Kleen
2008-11-19 0:01 ` H. Peter Anvin
2008-11-19 10:34 ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2008-11-19 20:09 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-11-19 0:18 ` [PATCH/RFC] Move entry_64.S register saving out of the macros Alexander van Heukelum
2008-11-19 17:54 ` H. Peter Anvin
2008-11-19 20:16 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-11-20 13:40 ` [PATCH] x86: clean up after: move " Alexander van Heukelum
2008-11-20 14:01 ` Andi Kleen
2008-11-20 15:04 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-11-20 15:26 ` Alexander van Heukelum
2008-11-20 15:39 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-11-20 15:50 ` [PATCH] x86: clean up after: move entry_64.S register savingout " Jan Beulich
2008-11-20 15:57 ` [PATCH] x86: clean up after: move entry_64.S register saving out " Alexander van Heukelum
2008-11-20 16:07 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2008-11-20 16:29 ` Alexander van Heukelum
2008-11-20 17:24 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-11-21 15:41 ` [PATCH] x86: Introduce save_rest and restructure the PTREGSCALL macro in entry_64.S Alexander van Heukelum
2008-11-21 15:43 ` [PATCH] x86: entry_64.S: Factor out save_paranoid and paranoid_exit Alexander van Heukelum
2008-11-21 15:44 ` [PATCH] Split out some macro's and move common code to paranoid_exit Alexander van Heukelum
2008-11-21 16:06 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-11-23 9:08 ` [PATCH] x86: include ENTRY/END in entry handlers in entry_64.S Alexander van Heukelum
2008-11-23 9:15 ` [PATCH] x86: KPROBE_ENTRY should be paired wth KPROBE_END Alexander van Heukelum
2008-11-23 13:27 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-11-23 13:51 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2008-11-23 14:12 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2008-11-23 14:55 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-11-23 15:04 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2008-11-23 15:04 ` Alexander van Heukelum
2008-11-23 15:12 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2008-11-23 15:31 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-11-23 15:41 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2008-11-23 15:37 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2008-11-23 16:29 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-11-24 9:17 ` Jan Beulich
2008-11-24 10:26 ` Alexander van Heukelum
2008-11-24 10:35 ` Jan Beulich
2008-11-24 12:24 ` [PATCH] x86_64: get rid of the use of KPROBE_ENTRY / KPROBE_END Alexander van Heukelum
2008-11-24 13:33 ` Jan Beulich
2008-11-24 14:38 ` [PATCH] i386: " Alexander van Heukelum
2008-11-23 9:21 ` [PATCH] x86: include ENTRY/END in entry handlers in entry_64.S Cyrill Gorcunov
2008-11-23 11:23 ` Alexander van Heukelum
2008-11-23 11:35 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2008-11-23 20:13 ` H. Peter Anvin
2008-11-24 10:06 ` Alexander van Heukelum
2008-11-24 18:07 ` H. Peter Anvin
2008-11-23 13:23 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-11-17 9:47 ` [PATCH] trivial, entry_64: remove whitespace at end of lines Ingo Molnar
2008-11-17 15:14 ` Alexander van Heukelum
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=20081119103415.GA16516@elte.hu \
--to=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=andi@firstfloor.org \
--cc=gcosta@redhat.com \
--cc=heukelum@fastmail.fm \
--cc=heukelum@mailshack.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=jbeulich@novell.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au \
--cc=roland@redhat.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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®