[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAKv+Gu98M9PZk3qm0PYC8nQ3zMvLZmNmOn4=hNdFE7NTBuHbgg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2017 13:14:54 +0100
From: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>
To: "Liuwenliang (Lamb)" <liuwenliang@...wei.com>
Cc: kbuild test robot <lkp@...el.com>,
"kbuild-all@...org" <kbuild-all@...org>,
"linux@...linux.org.uk" <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
"aryabinin@...tuozzo.com" <aryabinin@...tuozzo.com>,
"afzal.mohd.ma@...il.com" <afzal.mohd.ma@...il.com>,
"f.fainelli@...il.com" <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
"labbott@...hat.com" <labbott@...hat.com>,
"kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
"mhocko@...e.com" <mhocko@...e.com>,
"cdall@...aro.org" <cdall@...aro.org>,
"marc.zyngier@....com" <marc.zyngier@....com>,
"catalin.marinas@....com" <catalin.marinas@....com>,
"akpm@...ux-foundation.org" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"mawilcox@...rosoft.com" <mawilcox@...rosoft.com>,
"tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"thgarnie@...gle.com" <thgarnie@...gle.com>,
"keescook@...omium.org" <keescook@...omium.org>,
"arnd@...db.de" <arnd@...db.de>,
"vladimir.murzin@....com" <vladimir.murzin@....com>,
"tixy@...aro.org" <tixy@...aro.org>,
"robin.murphy@....com" <robin.murphy@....com>,
"mingo@...nel.org" <mingo@...nel.org>,
"grygorii.strashko@...aro.org" <grygorii.strashko@...aro.org>,
"glider@...gle.com" <glider@...gle.com>,
"dvyukov@...gle.com" <dvyukov@...gle.com>,
"opendmb@...il.com" <opendmb@...il.com>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"kasan-dev@...glegroups.com" <kasan-dev@...glegroups.com>,
"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
Jiazhenghua <jiazhenghua@...wei.com>,
Dailei <dylix.dailei@...wei.com>,
Zengweilin <zengweilin@...wei.com>,
Heshaoliang <heshaoliang@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/11] Define the virtual space of KASan's shadow region
On 16 October 2017 at 12:42, Liuwenliang (Lamb) <liuwenliang@...wei.com> wrote:
> On 10/16/2017 07:03 PM, Abbott Liu wrote:
>>arch/arm/kernel/entry-armv.S:348: Error: selected processor does not support `movw r1,
> #:lower16:((((0xC0000000-0x01000000)>>3)+((0xC0000000-0x01000000)-(1<<29))))' in ARM mode
>>arch/arm/kernel/entry-armv.S:348: Error: selected processor does not support `movt r1,
> #:upper16:((((0xC0000000-0x01000000)>>3)+((0xC0000000-0x01000000)-(1<<29))))' in ARM mode
>
> Thanks for building test. This error can be solved by following code:
> --- a/arch/arm/kernel/entry-armv.S
> +++ b/arch/arm/kernel/entry-armv.S
> @@ -188,8 +188,7 @@ ENDPROC(__und_invalid)
> get_thread_info tsk
> ldr r0, [tsk, #TI_ADDR_LIMIT]
> #ifdef CONFIG_KASAN
> - movw r1, #:lower16:TASK_SIZE
> - movt r1, #:upper16:TASK_SIZE
> + ldr r1, =TASK_SIZE
> #else
> mov r1, #TASK_SIZE
> #endif
This is unnecessary:
ldr r1, =TASK_SIZE
will be converted to a mov instruction by the assembler if the value
of TASK_SIZE fits its 12-bit immediate field.
So please remove the whole #ifdef, and just use ldr r1, =xxx
> @@ -446,7 +445,12 @@ ENDPROC(__fiq_abt)
> @ if it was interrupted in a critical region. Here we
> @ perform a quick test inline since it should be false
> @ 99.9999% of the time. The rest is done out of line.
> +#if CONFIG_KASAN
> + ldr r0, =TASK_SIZE
> + cmp r4, r0
> +#else
> cmp r4, #TASK_SIZE
> +#endif
> blhs kuser_cmpxchg64_fixup
> #endif
> #endif
>
> movt,movw can only be used in ARMv6*, ARMv7 instruction set. But ldr can be used in ARMv4*, ARMv5T*, ARMv6*, ARMv7.
> Maybe the performance is going to fall down by using ldr, but I think the influence of performance is very limited.
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists