From: "Thomas Weißschuh" <thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de>
To: Xi Ruoyao <xry111@xry111.site>
Cc: Vineet Gupta <vineetg@rivosinc.com>,
Alexandre Ghiti <alex@ghiti.fr>,
Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org>,
"Jason A . Donenfeld" <Jason@zx2c4.com>,
Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@sifive.com>,
Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@dabbelt.com>, Guo Ren <guoren@kernel.org>,
linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] RISC-V: vDSO: Correct inline assembly constraints in the getrandom syscall wrapper
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2025 09:11:30 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250610090648-c6d4e08a-3efa-4c19-9a03-d04a65d18af2@linutronix.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <6163d55a1e7910f89dda114a2ee52c9df5235dad.camel@xry111.site>
On Sat, Jun 07, 2025 at 10:16:34PM +0800, Xi Ruoyao wrote:
> On Fri, 2025-06-06 at 15:01 -0700, Vineet Gupta wrote:
> > On 6/6/25 02:24, Xi Ruoyao wrote:
> > > As recently pointed out by Thomas, if a register is forced for two
> > > different register variables, among them one is used as "+" (both input
> > > and output) and another is only used as input, Clang would treat the
> > > conflicting input parameters as undefined behaviour and optimize away
> > > the argument assignment.
> > >
> > > Per an example in the GCC documentation, for this purpose we can use "="
> > > (only output) for the output, and "0" for the input for that we must
> > > reuse the same register as the output. And GCC developers have
> > > confirmed using a simple "r" (that we use for most vDSO implementations)
> > > instead of "0" is also fine.
> > >
> > > Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20250603-loongarch-vdso-syscall-v1-1-6d12d6dfbdd0@linutronix.de/
> > > Link: https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-15.1.0/gcc/Local-Register-Variables.html
> > > Link: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-help/2025-June/144266.html
> > > Cc: Thomas Weißschuh <thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de>
> > > Cc: Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org>
> > > Signed-off-by: Xi Ruoyao <xry111@xry111.site>
> > > ---
> > >
> > > v1 -> v2: Keep using "r" for buffer to follow the existing convention
> > > (that the GCC developers have confirmed fine).
> > >
> > > arch/riscv/include/asm/vdso/getrandom.h | 2 +-
> > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/arch/riscv/include/asm/vdso/getrandom.h b/arch/riscv/include/asm/vdso/getrandom.h
> > > index 8dc92441702a..c6d66895c1f5 100644
> > > --- a/arch/riscv/include/asm/vdso/getrandom.h
> > > +++ b/arch/riscv/include/asm/vdso/getrandom.h
> > > @@ -18,7 +18,7 @@ static __always_inline ssize_t getrandom_syscall(void *_buffer, size_t _len, uns
> > > register unsigned int flags asm("a2") = _flags;
> > >
> > > asm volatile ("ecall\n"
> > > - : "+r" (ret)
> > > + : "=r" (ret)
> > > : "r" (nr), "r" (buffer), "r" (len), "r" (flags)
> > > : "memory");
> >
> > My 2 cents as I've dabbled into this for ARC glibc syscall macros [1] where r0
> > is both the first syscall/function arg and also the function/syscall return.
> >
> > The v2 approach still keeps 2 different variables in same local reg which has
> > potential for any future compiler shenanigans.
> > Segher's example avoided specifying the same reg.
> > What about something like the following: seems to generate the right code (with
> > gcc 15)
> >
> > register long ret asm("a0");
>
> Then it would be better to rename this variable to just "a0". And I
> guess Thomas doesn't want a new convention different from all other
> syscall wrappers in vDSO...
Indeed. I want to keep it consistent. Especially for a bugfix.
Speaking of which, IMO this patch should have a Fixes tag.
Then we could start a new discussion about changing it to something else everywhere.
Although I don't think that the single-variable variant is better.
> > register long nr asm("a7") = __NR_getrandom;
> > register size_t len asm("a1") = _len;
> > register unsigned int flags asm("a2") = _flags;
> > ret = (unsigned long) _buffer;
> >
> > asm volatile ("ecall\n"
> > : "+r" (ret) // keep "+r"
> > for input _buffer / output ret
> > : "r" (nr), "r" (len), "r" (flags)
> > : "memory");
> >
> > return ret;
> >
> > Thx,
> > -Vineet
> >
> > [1] https://github.com/bminor/glibc/blob/master/sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/arc/sysdep.h
>
> --
> Xi Ruoyao <xry111@xry111.site>
> School of Aerospace Science and Technology, Xidian University
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-06-10 7:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-04-11 2:46 [PATCH v2] RISC-V: vDSO: Wire up getrandom() vDSO implementation Xi Ruoyao
2025-04-11 8:04 ` Thomas Weißschuh
2025-05-23 8:01 ` Alexandre Ghiti
2025-05-23 8:02 ` Xi Ruoyao
2025-05-23 10:06 ` Alexandre Ghiti
2025-06-03 12:48 ` Xi Ruoyao
2025-06-04 11:45 ` Alexandre Ghiti
2025-06-04 15:09 ` [PATCH] RISC-V: vDSO: Correct inline assembly constraints in the getrandom syscall wrapper Xi Ruoyao
2025-06-05 7:15 ` Thomas Weißschuh
2025-06-06 9:24 ` [PATCH v2] " Xi Ruoyao
2025-06-06 9:50 ` Thomas Weißschuh
2025-06-06 22:01 ` Vineet Gupta
2025-06-07 14:16 ` Xi Ruoyao
2025-06-10 7:11 ` Thomas Weißschuh [this message]
2025-06-10 8:15 ` Alexandre Ghiti
2025-06-12 20:10 ` patchwork-bot+linux-riscv
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=20250610090648-c6d4e08a-3efa-4c19-9a03-d04a65d18af2@linutronix.de \
--to=thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de \
--cc=Jason@zx2c4.com \
--cc=alex@ghiti.fr \
--cc=guoren@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=nathan@kernel.org \
--cc=palmer@dabbelt.com \
--cc=paul.walmsley@sifive.com \
--cc=vineetg@rivosinc.com \
--cc=xry111@xry111.site \
/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®