[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20180319180759.506954903@linuxfoundation.org>
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2018 19:07:46 +0100
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
stable@...r.kernel.org, Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>,
"Naveen N. Rao" <naveen.n.rao@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
Sasha Levin <alexander.levin@...rosoft.com>
Subject: [PATCH 4.9 201/241] powerpc/modules: Dont try to restore r2 after a sibling call
4.9-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
------------------
From: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>
[ Upstream commit b9eab08d012fa093947b230f9a87257c27fb829b ]
When attempting to load a livepatch module, I got the following error:
module_64: patch_module: Expect noop after relocate, got 3c820000
The error was triggered by the following code in
unregister_netdevice_queue():
14c: 00 00 00 48 b 14c <unregister_netdevice_queue+0x14c>
14c: R_PPC64_REL24 net_set_todo
150: 00 00 82 3c addis r4,r2,0
GCC didn't insert a nop after the branch to net_set_todo() because it's
a sibling call, so it never returns. The nop isn't needed after the
branch in that case.
Signed-off-by: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>
Acked-by: Naveen N. Rao <naveen.n.rao@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Reviewed-and-tested-by: Kamalesh Babulal <kamalesh@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Signed-off-by: Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <alexander.levin@...rosoft.com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
---
arch/powerpc/include/asm/code-patching.h | 1 +
arch/powerpc/kernel/module_64.c | 12 +++++++++++-
arch/powerpc/lib/code-patching.c | 5 +++++
3 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
--- a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/code-patching.h
+++ b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/code-patching.h
@@ -30,6 +30,7 @@ int patch_branch(unsigned int *addr, uns
int patch_instruction(unsigned int *addr, unsigned int instr);
int instr_is_relative_branch(unsigned int instr);
+int instr_is_relative_link_branch(unsigned int instr);
int instr_is_branch_to_addr(const unsigned int *instr, unsigned long addr);
unsigned long branch_target(const unsigned int *instr);
unsigned int translate_branch(const unsigned int *dest,
--- a/arch/powerpc/kernel/module_64.c
+++ b/arch/powerpc/kernel/module_64.c
@@ -494,7 +494,17 @@ static bool is_early_mcount_callsite(u32
restore r2. */
static int restore_r2(u32 *instruction, struct module *me)
{
- if (is_early_mcount_callsite(instruction - 1))
+ u32 *prev_insn = instruction - 1;
+
+ if (is_early_mcount_callsite(prev_insn))
+ return 1;
+
+ /*
+ * Make sure the branch isn't a sibling call. Sibling calls aren't
+ * "link" branches and they don't return, so they don't need the r2
+ * restore afterwards.
+ */
+ if (!instr_is_relative_link_branch(*prev_insn))
return 1;
if (*instruction != PPC_INST_NOP) {
--- a/arch/powerpc/lib/code-patching.c
+++ b/arch/powerpc/lib/code-patching.c
@@ -95,6 +95,11 @@ int instr_is_relative_branch(unsigned in
return instr_is_branch_iform(instr) || instr_is_branch_bform(instr);
}
+int instr_is_relative_link_branch(unsigned int instr)
+{
+ return instr_is_relative_branch(instr) && (instr & BRANCH_SET_LINK);
+}
+
static unsigned long branch_iform_target(const unsigned int *instr)
{
signed long imm;
Powered by blists - more mailing lists