Re: [PATCH] checkpatch: add warning for avoiding .L prefix symbols in assembly files

[Aditya <yashsri421@gmail.com>]

On 21/1/21 12:13 am, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Wed, 2021-01-20 at 18:23 +0530, Aditya wrote:
>> On 20/1/21 2:51 pm, Joe Perches wrote:
>>> On Wed, 2021-01-20 at 12:55 +0530, Aditya Srivastava wrote:
>>>> Local symbols prefixed with '.L' do not emit symbol table entries, as
>>>> they have special meaning for the assembler.
>>>>
>>>> '.L' prefixed symbols can be used within a code region, but should be
>>>> avoided for denoting a range of code via 'SYM_*_START/END' annotations.
>>>>
>>>> Add a new check to emit a warning on finding the usage of '.L' symbols
>>>> in '.S' files, if it lies within SYM_*_START/END annotation pair.
>>>
>>> I believe this needs a test for $file as it won't work well on
>>> patches as the SYM_*_START/END may not be in the patch context.
>>>
>> Okay.
>>
>>> Also, is this supposed to work for local labels like '.L<foo>:'?
>>> I don't think a warning should be generated for those.
>>>
>> Yes, currently it will generate warning for all symbols which start
>> with .L and have non- white character symbol following it, if it is
>> lying within SYM_*_START/END annotation pair.
>>
>> Should I reduce the check to \.L_\S+ instead? (please note "_"
>> following ".L")
> 
> Use grep first.  That would still match several existing labels.
> 
>> Pardon me, I'm not good with assembly :/
> 
> Spending time reading docs can help with that.
> 
> Mark?  Can you please comment about the below?
> 
> I believe the test should be:
> 
> 	if ($realfile =~ /\.S$/ &&
> 	    $line =~ /^\+\s*SYM_[A-Z]+_(?:START|END)(?:_[A-Z_]+)?\s*\(\s*\.L/) {

Joe, with this regex, we won't be able to match
"jmp  .L_restore
SYM_FUNC_END(\name)"

which was replaced in this patch in the discussion:
https://groups.google.com/g/clang-built-linux/c/-drkmLgu-cU/m/phKe-Tb6CgAJ

Here, "jmp  .L_restore" was also replaced to fix the error.

However, if this
regex(/^\+\s*SYM_[A-Z]+_(?:START|END)(?:_[A-Z_]+)?\s*\(\s*\.L/) is
correct, maybe we don't need to check for $file as we are now checking
for just one line.

What do you think?

Thanks
Aditya

> 		WARN(...);
> 	}
> 
> so that only this code currently matches:
> 
> $ git grep -P '^\s*SYM_[A-Z]+_(?:START|END)(?:_[A-Z_]+)?\s*\(\s*\.L' -- '*.S'
> arch/x86/boot/compressed/head_32.S:SYM_FUNC_START_LOCAL_NOALIGN(.Lrelocated)
> arch/x86/boot/compressed/head_32.S:SYM_FUNC_END(.Lrelocated)
> arch/x86/boot/compressed/head_64.S:SYM_FUNC_START_LOCAL_NOALIGN(.Lrelocated)
> arch/x86/boot/compressed/head_64.S:SYM_FUNC_END(.Lrelocated)
> arch/x86/boot/compressed/head_64.S:SYM_FUNC_START_LOCAL_NOALIGN(.Lpaging_enabled)
> arch/x86/boot/compressed/head_64.S:SYM_FUNC_END(.Lpaging_enabled)
> arch/x86/boot/compressed/head_64.S:SYM_FUNC_START_LOCAL_NOALIGN(.Lno_longmode)
> arch/x86/boot/compressed/head_64.S:SYM_FUNC_END(.Lno_longmode)
> arch/x86/boot/pmjump.S:SYM_FUNC_START_LOCAL_NOALIGN(.Lin_pm32)
> arch/x86/boot/pmjump.S:SYM_FUNC_END(.Lin_pm32)
> arch/x86/entry/entry_64.S:SYM_CODE_START_LOCAL_NOALIGN(.Lbad_gs)
> arch/x86/entry/entry_64.S:SYM_CODE_END(.Lbad_gs)
> arch/x86/lib/copy_user_64.S:SYM_CODE_START_LOCAL(.Lcopy_user_handle_tail)
> arch/x86/lib/copy_user_64.S:SYM_CODE_END(.Lcopy_user_handle_tail)
> arch/x86/lib/getuser.S:SYM_CODE_START_LOCAL(.Lbad_get_user_clac)
> arch/x86/lib/getuser.S:SYM_CODE_END(.Lbad_get_user_clac)
> arch/x86/lib/getuser.S:SYM_CODE_START_LOCAL(.Lbad_get_user_8_clac)
> arch/x86/lib/getuser.S:SYM_CODE_END(.Lbad_get_user_8_clac)
> arch/x86/lib/putuser.S:SYM_CODE_START_LOCAL(.Lbad_put_user_clac)
> arch/x86/lib/putuser.S:SYM_CODE_END(.Lbad_put_user_clac)
> arch/x86/realmode/rm/wakeup_asm.S:SYM_DATA_START_LOCAL(.Lwakeup_idt)
> arch/x86/realmode/rm/wakeup_asm.S:SYM_DATA_END(.Lwakeup_idt)
> 
>