From: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
Michal Marek <mmarek@suse.cz>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>, Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>,
X86 ML <x86@kernel.org>,
live-patching@vger.kernel.org,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 13/21] x86/asm/crypto: Fix frame pointer usage in aesni-intel_asm.S
Date: Mon, 20 Jul 2015 08:59:30 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150720135930.GB7326@treble.redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150720075611.GA11874@gmail.com>
On Mon, Jul 20, 2015 at 09:56:11AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >
> > The reason I suggested to put FRAME in the macro name is to try to prevent it
> > from being accidentally used for leaf functions, where it isn't needed.
>
> Well, we could use LEAF_FUNCTION to mark that fact.
>
> Wether a function written in assembly is a leaf function or not is a higher level
> (and thus more valuable) piece of information whether we generate frame pointer
> debuginfo or not.
>
> > Also the naming of FUNCTION_ENTRY and FUNCTION_RETURN doesn't do anything to
> > distinguish them from the already ubiquitous ENTRY and ENDPROC. So as a kernel
> > developer it seems confusing to me, e.g. how do I remember when to use
> > FUNCTION_ENTRY vs ENTRY?
>
> 'ENDPROC' is really leftover from older debuginfo cruft, it's not a valuable
> construct IMHO, even if it's (sadly) ubiquitious.
>
> We want to create new, clean, as minimal as possible and as clearly named as
> possible debuginfo constructs from first principles.
Ok. So if I understand right, the proposal is:
Replace *all* x86 usage of ENTRY/ENDPROC with either:
FUNCTION_ENTRY(func)
FUNCTION_RETURN(func)
or
LEAF_FUNCTION_ENTRY(func)
LEAF_FUNCTION_RETURN(func)
Those sound fine to me.
I should point out that there are still a few cases where the more
granular FRAME/ENDFRAME and ENTRY/ENDPROC macros would still be needed.
For example, if the function ends with a jump instead of a ret. If the
jump is a sibling call, the code would look like:
FUNCTION_ENTRY(func)
...
ENDFRAME
jmp another_func
ENDPROC(func)
Or if it's a jump within the function to an internal ret:
FUNCTION_ENTRY(func)
...
1: ...
ENDFRAME
ret
2: ...
jmp 1b
ENDPROC(func)
Or if it jumps to some shared code before returning:
FUNCTION_ENTRY(func_1)
...
jmp common_return
ENDPROC(func_1)
FUNCTION_ENTRY(func_2)
...
jmp common_return
ENDPROC(func_2)
common_return:
...
ENDFRAME
ret
So in some cases we'd still need the more granular macros, unless we
decided to make special macros for these cases as well.
--
Josh
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-07-20 13:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 90+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-07-14 17:14 [PATCH v7 0/4] Compile-time stack validation Josh Poimboeuf
2015-07-14 17:14 ` [PATCH v7 1/4] x86/asm: Frame pointer macro cleanup Josh Poimboeuf
2015-07-14 17:14 ` [PATCH v7 2/4] x86/stackvalidate: Compile-time stack validation Josh Poimboeuf
2015-07-14 20:57 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-07-14 21:11 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2015-07-14 21:08 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-07-14 21:30 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2015-07-14 21:56 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-07-14 22:32 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2015-07-20 16:53 ` Namhyung Kim
2015-07-20 17:50 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2015-07-21 8:02 ` Ingo Molnar
2015-07-21 12:04 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2015-07-21 8:42 ` Bernd Petrovitsch
2015-07-21 12:06 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2015-07-14 17:14 ` [PATCH v7 3/4] x86/stackvalidate: Add file and directory ignores Josh Poimboeuf
2015-07-14 17:14 ` [PATCH v7 4/4] x86/stackvalidate: Add ignore macros Josh Poimboeuf
2015-07-14 17:25 ` [PATCH v7 0/4] Compile-time stack validation Josh Poimboeuf
2015-07-15 10:16 ` Ingo Molnar
2015-07-15 16:05 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2015-07-17 16:47 ` [RFC PATCH 00/21] x86: Proposed fixes for stackvalidate warnings Josh Poimboeuf
2015-07-17 16:47 ` [RFC PATCH 01/21] stackvalidate: Process ignores earlier and add more ignore checks Josh Poimboeuf
2015-07-17 16:47 ` [RFC PATCH 02/21] stackvalidate: Add C version of STACKVALIDATE_IGNORE_INSN Josh Poimboeuf
2015-07-18 14:56 ` Borislav Petkov
2015-07-18 16:00 ` Josh Poimboeuf
[not found] ` <CA+55aFyoO75n-mQBrB_YBLx9yNpAjisFAqkO8+YsphD-xmgY+w@mail.gmail.com>
2015-07-18 16:40 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2015-07-17 16:47 ` [RFC PATCH 03/21] x86/asm: Add C versions of FRAME and ENDFRAME macros Josh Poimboeuf
2015-07-17 16:47 ` [RFC PATCH 04/21] x86/hweight: Add stack frame dependency for __arch_hweight*() Josh Poimboeuf
2015-07-17 17:17 ` Borislav Petkov
2015-07-17 17:32 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2015-07-18 5:05 ` Borislav Petkov
2015-07-18 13:44 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2015-07-18 14:56 ` Borislav Petkov
2015-07-18 15:57 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2015-07-19 4:12 ` Borislav Petkov
2015-07-22 0:13 ` Andy Lutomirski
2015-07-22 4:25 ` Borislav Petkov
2015-07-22 4:39 ` Andy Lutomirski
2015-07-22 4:45 ` Borislav Petkov
2015-07-17 16:47 ` [RFC PATCH 05/21] x86/xen: Add stack frame dependency to hypercall inline asm calls Josh Poimboeuf
2015-07-17 16:47 ` [RFC PATCH 06/21] x86/paravirt: Add stack frame dependency to PVOP " Josh Poimboeuf
2015-07-17 16:47 ` [RFC PATCH 07/21] x86/paravirt: Fix frame pointer usage in PV_CALLEE_SAVE_REGS_THUNK Josh Poimboeuf
2015-07-17 16:47 ` [RFC PATCH 08/21] x86/paravirt: Align paravirt thunk functions at 16-byte boundaries Josh Poimboeuf
2015-07-17 16:47 ` [RFC PATCH 09/21] x86/amd: Set ELF function type for vide() Josh Poimboeuf
2015-07-17 16:47 ` [RFC PATCH 10/21] x86/reboot: Add ljmp instructions to stackvalidate whitelist Josh Poimboeuf
2015-07-17 16:47 ` [RFC PATCH 11/21] x86/xen: Add xen_cpuid() and xen_setup_gdt() to stackvalidate whitelists Josh Poimboeuf
2015-07-17 16:47 ` [RFC PATCH 12/21] sched: Add __schedule() to stackvalidate whitelist Josh Poimboeuf
2015-07-17 19:46 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-07-17 19:58 ` Andy Lutomirski
2015-07-17 21:03 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-07-17 21:23 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2015-07-18 3:44 ` Ingo Molnar
2015-07-17 16:47 ` [RFC PATCH 13/21] x86/asm/crypto: Fix frame pointer usage in aesni-intel_asm.S Josh Poimboeuf
2015-07-17 19:43 ` Ingo Molnar
2015-07-17 19:44 ` Andy Lutomirski
2015-07-17 20:37 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2015-07-17 20:39 ` Andy Lutomirski
2015-07-17 20:44 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2015-07-17 20:46 ` Andy Lutomirski
2015-07-17 20:59 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2015-07-17 21:01 ` Andy Lutomirski
2015-07-17 21:10 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2015-07-18 8:42 ` Borislav Petkov
2015-07-18 13:46 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2015-07-18 14:25 ` Borislav Petkov
2015-07-18 15:40 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2015-07-18 2:51 ` Ingo Molnar
2015-07-18 3:56 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2015-07-20 7:56 ` Ingo Molnar
2015-07-20 13:59 ` Josh Poimboeuf [this message]
2015-07-20 17:21 ` Ingo Molnar
2015-07-20 18:00 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2015-07-22 11:52 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2015-07-20 15:30 ` Andy Lutomirski
2015-07-20 16:36 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2015-07-20 16:52 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-07-20 17:19 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2015-07-21 8:00 ` Ingo Molnar
2015-07-21 12:06 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2015-07-17 16:47 ` [RFC PATCH 14/21] x86/asm/crypto: Move .Lbswap_mask data to .rodata section Josh Poimboeuf
2015-07-17 16:47 ` [RFC PATCH 15/21] x86/asm/crypto: Move jump_table " Josh Poimboeuf
2015-07-17 16:47 ` [RFC PATCH 16/21] x86/asm/crypto: Fix frame pointer usage in clmul_ghash_mul/update() Josh Poimboeuf
2015-07-17 16:47 ` [RFC PATCH 17/21] x86/asm/entry: Fix frame pointer usage in thunk functions Josh Poimboeuf
2015-07-17 16:47 ` [RFC PATCH 18/21] x86/asm/acpi: Fix frame pointer usage in do_suspend_lowlevel() Josh Poimboeuf
2015-07-17 16:47 ` [RFC PATCH 19/21] x86/asm: Fix frame pointer usage in rwsem functions Josh Poimboeuf
2015-07-17 16:47 ` [RFC PATCH 20/21] x86/asm/efi: Fix frame pointer usage in efi_call() Josh Poimboeuf
2015-07-17 16:47 ` [RFC PATCH 21/21] x86/asm/power: Fix frame pointer usage in hibernate_asm_64.S Josh Poimboeuf
2015-07-17 18:56 ` [RFC PATCH 00/21] x86: Proposed fixes for stackvalidate warnings Andy Lutomirski
2015-07-18 3:05 ` Ingo Molnar
2015-07-18 21:02 [RFC PATCH 13/21] x86/asm/crypto: Fix frame pointer usage in aesni-intel_asm.S Gustavo da Silva
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=20150720135930.GB7326@treble.redhat.com \
--to=jpoimboe@redhat.com \
--cc=andi@firstfloor.org \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=live-patching@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=luto@amacapital.net \
--cc=luto@kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=mmarek@suse.cz \
--cc=palves@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--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
Powered by JetHome