[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <d7965189-c984-b177-8c69-c0e7ee78e71f@iogearbox.net>
Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2019 15:37:25 +0100
From: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>
To: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>, tglx@...utronix.de
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mliska@...e.cz,
"H . J . Lu" <hjl.tools@...il.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@...hat.com>,
Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@...el.com>,
Magnus Karlsson <magnus.karlsson@...el.com>,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
"David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86, retpolines: entirely disable switch jump tables when
retpolines are enabled
On 03/25/2019 03:28 PM, David Woodhouse wrote:
> On Mon, 2019-03-25 at 14:56 +0100, Daniel Borkmann wrote:
>> More than 20 switch cases are not expected to be fast-path critical, but
>> it would still be good to align with gcc behavior for versions < 8.4.0 in
>> order to have consistency across supported gcc versions. vmlinux size is
>> slightly growing by 0.27% for older gcc. This flag is only set to work
>> around affected gcc, no change for clang.
>
> I note your final sentence doesn't actually say that clang doesn't have
> this problem, and doesn't *need* this (or an equivalent) change.
>
> It should say that (if it's true). And if it isn't true, then other
> remedial action would be in order.
clang doesn't have this problem as analyzed back in ce02ef06fcf7 ("x86,
retpolines: Raise limit for generating indirect calls from switch-case").
I thought both here would make it quite clear, from this patch commit msg:
"After this has been brought to attention to gcc folks [0], Martin Liska
has then fixed gcc to align with clang by avoiding to generate switch
jump tables entirely under retpolines."
And the comment in the Makefile code:
# Additionally, avoid generating expensive indirect jumps which
# are subject to retpolines for small number of switch cases.
# clang turns off jump table generation by default when under
# retpoline builds, however, gcc does not for x86. This has
# only been fixed starting from gcc stable version 8.4.0 and
# onwards, but not for older ones. See gcc bug #86952.
Thanks,
Daniel
Powered by blists - more mailing lists