From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S935490AbeAKR4m (ORCPT <rfc822;ralf@linux-mips.org> + 1 other);
        Thu, 11 Jan 2018 12:56:42 -0500
Received: from merlin.infradead.org ([205.233.59.134]:40730 "EHLO
        merlin.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S932621AbeAKR4k (ORCPT
        <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Thu, 11 Jan 2018 12:56:40 -0500
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2018 18:56:26 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>,
        Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>,
        the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>, Paul Turner <pjt@google.com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linux-foundation.org>,
        Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@google.com>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>,
        Jiri Kosina <jikos@kernel.org>,
        One Thousand Gnomes <gnomes@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] objtool: Ignore retpoline alternatives
Message-ID: <20180111175626.GJ6176@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
References: <cover.1515635197.git.jpoimboe@redhat.com>
 <a181ea89cc196187b85867cb5eb13707279a887a.1515635197.git.jpoimboe@redhat.com>
 <1515688058.22302.366.camel@infradead.org>
 <CA+55aFzLA2dBhVTsvEBZ58aS2Jgp020cPC3MvMR_RuJqFmM67Q@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CA+55aFzLA2dBhVTsvEBZ58aS2Jgp020cPC3MvMR_RuJqFmM67Q@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.2 (2017-12-15)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>

On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 09:29:48AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:

> Secondly, we use lots of the the "small numbers for local labels" both
> in inline asm and in *.S files.
> 
> I think doing
> 
>        jne 1f
>   ...
>   1:
> 
> is a _hell_ of a lot more legible than
> 
>         jne .LPrefix_%
>     ...
>   .LPrefix_%
> 
> unless you have some *major* reason to use an explicit label name.

Small number maybe; but the value at hand was a random 999 or so, which
is not a small number.

But I find a descriptive label ever so much better than a random number.

> Sure, if you grew up writing perl, and think that an illegible mess of
> random characters is a requirement for programming, then the ".L%"
> format looks natural.

I grew up on BASIC and have bad memories of random big number goto. I'll
take those random trailing character any day if it includes human
readable bits before.

> But if you're an actual human, the "small numbers as labels" is fine.

I find descriptive labels much nicer than random numbers, I'll take some
crazy characters if so required.


Consider the retpoline thing:

 call .Lset_up_target
.Lcapture_spec:
  pause
  jmp .Lcapture_spec
.Lset_up_target:
  mov %r11, (%rsp);
  ret;


over:

 call 2f
1:
 pause
 jmp 1b
2:
 mov %r11, (%rsp)
 ret


give me the first any day of the week.