[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170921165954.GA13666@miguelinux-clr.zpn.intel.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2017 11:59:54 -0500
From: Miguel Bernal Marin <miguel.bernal.marin@...ux.intel.com>
To: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
x86@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/6] locking/rwsem/x86: Add stack frame dependency for
some inline asm
On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 04:24:18PM -0500, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 06:37:39PM -0500, Miguel Bernal Marin wrote:
> > Some warning were showed by objtool using gcc 7.2.0
> >
> > kernel/locking/rwsem.o: warning: objtool: up_read()+0x11: call without frame pointer save/setup
> > kernel/locking/rwsem.o: warning: objtool: up_write()+0x17: call without frame pointer save/setup
> > kernel/locking/rwsem.o: warning: objtool: downgrade_write()+0x22: call without frame pointer save/setup
> >
> > which means gcc placed an inline asm function and its call instruction before
> > the frame pointer setup.
> >
> > This series forces a stack frame to be created before the call instruction
> > by listing the stack pointer as an output operand in the inline asm statement.
> >
> > Also to be easy to maintain and understand the operands from the extended
> > assembler instructions were converted to named operands.
>
> I've got a patch going around which will change the way we do this, so
> you'll probably need to do a v3 after my patch gets merged. I'll add
> you to cc for the next revision.
>
Ok, I will wait to see your changes merged.
Thanks.
> --
> Josh
--
Regards,
Miguel Bernal Marin Open Source Technology Center
https://clearlinux.org Intel Corporation
Powered by blists - more mailing lists