[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <d7bd4002-41dd-d0b1-f69e-30546b0ea41d@google.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2017 14:29:13 -0700
From: Greg Hackmann <ghackmann@...gle.com>
To: hpa@...or.com, Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Cc: Matthias Kaehlcke <mka@...omium.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
"x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Grant Grundler <grundler@...omium.org>,
Michael Davidson <md@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] x86/mm/kaslr: Use _ASM_MUL macro for multiplication
On 04/26/2017 02:24 PM, hpa@...or.com wrote:
>>> This really feels like a "fix your compiler" issue.
>>
>> We already use the other forms, what's so bad about adding mul too?
>> And if this lets us build under clang, all the better.
>>
>> -Kees
>
> It's not bad per se, but if this doesn't eventually gets fixed in clang we'll have no end of this crap.
>
AIUI the "problem" is that clang is spilling mix_const into memory
rather than assigning it to a register. This is perfectly legal since
mix_const has a constraint of "rm". But mul needs a suffix when the
input is a memory location, since it can't infer the multiplication
width from the input operand anymore.
You get the same error message with gcc if you force it to use a memory
location, by narrowing the constraint from "rm" to "m".
Powered by blists - more mailing lists