linux-kernel - Re: [RFC/PATCH 0/3] ARM: Use udiv/sdiv for __aeabi

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 24 Nov 2015 14:00:47 +0000
From:	Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>
To:	Måns Rullgård <mans@...sr.com>
Cc:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...eaurora.org>,
	Nicolas Pitre <nicolas.pitre@...aro.org>,
	Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@...aro.org>,
	"linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org" <linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org>,
	Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>,
	lkml - Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
	Christopher Covington <cov@...eaurora.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCH 0/3] ARM: Use udiv/sdiv for __aeabi_{u}idiv library
 functions

On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 12:29:06PM +0000, Måns Rullgård wrote:
> Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk> writes:
> 
> > On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 12:10:02PM +0000, Måns Rullgård wrote:
> >> Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk> writes:
> >> 
> >> > On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 11:38:53AM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> >> >> I suggested using -mcpu=cortex-a15 because there are old gcc versions
> >> >> that don't know about -march=armv7ve or -march=armv7-a+idiv yet, but
> >> >> that do understand -mcpu=cortex-a15.
> >> >
> >> > That's not all.  The bigger problem is that there are toolchains out
> >> > there which accept these options, but do _not_ support IDIV in either
> >> > ARM or Thumb mode.  I'm afraid that makes it impossible to add this
> >> > feature to the mainline kernel in this form: we need to run a test
> >> > build to check that -march=armv7ve or what-not really does work
> >> > through both GCC and GAS.
> >> 
> >> If the compiler accepts the option but doesn't actually emit any div
> >> instructions, is there any real harm?
> >
> > That's not what I've found.  I've found that asking the assembler
> > to accept idiv instructions appears to be ignored, which is something
> > completely different.
> >
> > Further to this, what it comes down to is the stupid idea that the
> > compiler should embed .arch / .cpu in the assembly output, which has
> > the effect of overriding the command line arguments given to it via
> > -Wa.  So, giving -Wa,-mcpu=cortex-a15 is a total no-op, because the
> > first thing in the assembly output is:
> >
> > 	.arch armv7-a
> >
> > which kills off any attempt to set the assembly level ISA from the
> > command line.
> 
> Oh, you mean the compiler knows about the instructions but the assembler
> doesn't or isn't passed the right options.  It's infuriating when that
> happens.

No, that isn't what I meant.

-- 
FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line: currently at 9.6Mbps down 400kbps up
according to speedtest.net.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/