From: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu>
To: Sathvika Vasireddy <sv@linux.ibm.com>,
jpoimboe@kernel.org, peterz@infradead.org, npiggin@gmail.com,
maddy@linux.ibm.com, Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
llvm@lists.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] objtool: Skip unannotated intra-function call warning for bl+mflr pattern
Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2025 14:19:14 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <8f4ec6d4-2646-4a87-b3a1-edfaecff2a01@csgroup.eu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <d5ada017-1ba2-4a89-8a58-4555f09f9d97@csgroup.eu>
Le 24/02/2025 à 11:33, Christophe Leroy a écrit :
>
>
> Le 24/02/2025 à 08:15, Christophe Leroy a écrit :
>>
>>
>> Le 19/02/2025 à 17:20, Sathvika Vasireddy a écrit :
>>> Architectures like PowerPC use a pattern where the compiler generates a
>>> branch-and-link (bl) instruction that targets the very next instruction,
>>> followed by loading the link register (mflr) later. This pattern appears
>>> in the code like:
>>>
>>> bl .+4
>>> li r5,0
>>> mflr r30
>>
>> What compiler do you use ? Is it a very old version of GCC ?
>
> Oh, I see that this is a report on a projet version of clang ? compiler:
> clang version 21.0.0git
>
> Then I guess the bug needs to be fixed in Clang, not in the kernel.
Well, this problem already exists on clang 18 it seems:
00000004 <btext_map>:
4: 7c 08 02 a6 mflr r0
8: 94 21 ff e0 stwu r1,-32(r1)
c: 93 c1 00 18 stw r30,24(r1)
10: 90 01 00 24 stw r0,36(r1)
14: 93 a1 00 14 stw r29,20(r1)
18: 48 00 00 05 bl 1c <btext_map+0x18>
1c: 38 a0 00 00 li r5,0
20: 7f c8 02 a6 mflr r30
While GCC generates:
00000418 <btext_map>:
418: 94 21 ff e0 stwu r1,-32(r1)
41c: 7c 08 02 a6 mflr r0
420: 42 9f 00 05 bcl 20,4*cr7+so,424 <btext_map+0xc>
424: 39 20 00 00 li r9,0
428: 93 c1 00 18 stw r30,24(r1)
42c: 7f c8 02 a6 mflr r30
So lets make the kernel tolerate it allthough it should be fixed on
clang at the end.
I can't find any related issue in the clang issues database
(https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues), should we open one ?
Christophe
>
>>
>> That sequence is not correct and should never be used by modern
>> compilers. It should be bcl 20,31,+4 instead.
>>
>> All such hand writen sequences have been removed from kernel assembly,
>> see commit c974809a26a1 ("powerpc/vdso: Avoid link stack corruption in
>> __get_datapage()") for details
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Objtool currently warns about this as an "unannotated intra-function
>>> call" because find_call_destination() fails to find any symbol at the
>>> target offset. Add a check to skip the warning when a branch targets
>>> the immediate next instruction in the same function.
>>
>> I think this should be done in arch_decode_instruction(), just set
>> insn- >type to INSN_OTHER when you see bl .+4
>>
>> Something like:
>>
>> diff --git a/tools/objtool/arch/powerpc/decode.c b/tools/objtool/arch/
>> powerpc/decode.c
>> index 53b55690f320..ca264c97ee8d 100644
>> --- a/tools/objtool/arch/powerpc/decode.c
>> +++ b/tools/objtool/arch/powerpc/decode.c
>> @@ -55,7 +55,9 @@ int arch_decode_instruction(struct objtool_file
>> *file, const struct section *sec
>>
>> switch (opcode) {
>> case 18: /* b[l][a] */
>> - if ((ins & 3) == 1) /* bl */
>> + if (ins == 0x48000005) /* bl .+4 */
>> + typ = INSN_OTHER;
>> + else if ((ins & 3) == 1) /* bl */
>> typ = INSN_CALL;
>>
>> imm = ins & 0x3fffffc;
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
>>> Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202502180818.XnFdv8I8-
>>> lkp@intel.com/
>>> Signed-off-by: Sathvika Vasireddy <sv@linux.ibm.com>
>>> ---
>>> tools/objtool/check.c | 6 ++++++
>>> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/tools/objtool/check.c b/tools/objtool/check.c
>>> index 753dbc4f8198..3f7cf2c917b5 100644
>>> --- a/tools/objtool/check.c
>>> +++ b/tools/objtool/check.c
>>> @@ -1613,6 +1613,7 @@ static struct symbol
>>> *find_call_destination(struct section *sec, unsigned long o
>>> */
>>> static int add_call_destinations(struct objtool_file *file)
>>> {
>>> + struct instruction *next_insn;
>>> struct instruction *insn;
>>> unsigned long dest_off;
>>> struct symbol *dest;
>>> @@ -1625,6 +1626,11 @@ static int add_call_destinations(struct
>>> objtool_file *file)
>>> reloc = insn_reloc(file, insn);
>>> if (!reloc) {
>>> dest_off = arch_jump_destination(insn);
>>> +
>>> + next_insn = next_insn_same_func(file, insn);
>>> + if (next_insn && dest_off == next_insn->offset)
>>> + continue;
>>> +
>>> dest = find_call_destination(insn->sec,
>>> dest_off);
>>>
>>> add_call_dest(file, insn, dest, false);
>>> --
>>> 2.39.3
>>>
>>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-02-24 13:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-02-19 16:20 Sathvika Vasireddy
2025-02-20 19:59 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2025-02-21 8:50 ` Sathvika Vasireddy
2025-02-24 10:36 ` Christophe Leroy
2025-02-24 12:35 ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-02-24 16:25 ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-02-24 17:54 ` Christophe Leroy
2025-02-24 7:15 ` Christophe Leroy
2025-02-24 10:33 ` Christophe Leroy
2025-02-24 13:19 ` Christophe Leroy [this message]
2025-02-24 17:09 ` Nathan Chancellor
2025-02-25 7:35 ` Christophe Leroy
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=8f4ec6d4-2646-4a87-b3a1-edfaecff2a01@csgroup.eu \
--to=christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu \
--cc=jpoimboe@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=llvm@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=maddy@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=nathan@kernel.org \
--cc=npiggin@gmail.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=sv@linux.ibm.com \
/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®