linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] ARM: use arch_extension directive instead of arch argument

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <7798addc2c24a3a3bee2954a854335cf@agner.ch>
Date:   Wed, 10 Apr 2019 10:42:30 +0200
From:   Stefan Agner <stefan@...er.ch>
To:     Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>
Cc:     arm@...nel.org, linux@...linux.org.uk, arnd@...db.de,
        ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org, robin.murphy@....com,
        nicolas.pitre@...aro.org, f.fainelli@...il.com, rjui@...adcom.com,
        sbranden@...adcom.com, bcm-kernel-feedback-list@...adcom.com,
        kgene@...nel.org, krzk@...nel.org, robh@...nel.org,
        ssantosh@...nel.org, jason@...edaemon.net, andrew@...n.ch,
        gregory.clement@...tlin.com, sebastian.hesselbarth@...il.com,
        marc.w.gonzalez@...e.fr, mans@...sr.com, ndesaulniers@...gle.com,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] ARM: use arch_extension directive instead of arch
 argument

On 09.04.2019 16:50, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> * Stefan Agner <stefan@...er.ch> [190408 20:59]:
>> --- a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/Makefile
>> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/Makefile
>> @@ -41,11 +41,6 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_OMAP5)			+= $(omap-4-5-common) $(smp-y) sleep44xx.o
>>  obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_AM43XX)		+= $(omap-4-5-common)
>>  obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_DRA7XX)		+= $(omap-4-5-common) $(smp-y) sleep44xx.o
>>
>> -plus_sec := $(call as-instr,.arch_extension sec,+sec)
>> -AFLAGS_omap-headsmp.o			:=-Wa,-march=armv7-a$(plus_sec)
>> -AFLAGS_omap-smc.o			:=-Wa,-march=armv7-a$(plus_sec)
>> -AFLAGS_sleep44xx.o			:=-Wa,-march=armv7-a$(plus_sec)
>> -
>>  # Functions loaded to SRAM
>>  obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_OMAP2420)		+= sram242x.o
>>  obj-$(CONFIG_SOC_OMAP2430)		+= sram243x.o
>> @@ -95,9 +90,6 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_POWER_AVS_OMAP)		+= sr_device.o
>>  obj-$(CONFIG_POWER_AVS_OMAP_CLASS3)    += smartreflex-class3.o
>>
>>  AFLAGS_sleep24xx.o			:=-Wa,-march=armv6
>> -AFLAGS_sleep34xx.o			:=-Wa,-march=armv7-a$(plus_sec)
>> -AFLAGS_sleep33xx.o			:=-Wa,-march=armv7-a$(plus_sec)
>> -AFLAGS_sleep43xx.o			:=-Wa,-march=armv7-a$(plus_sec)
> 
> I think we should also change the AFLAGS_sleep24xx.o above the
> same way but with armv6 flags. This can be build tested with
> omap2plus_defconfig.

>From what I can tell, since those do not add the sec extension they
should work fine for LLVM's integrated assembler. But I agree, for
consistency it would be nice to get rid of them the same way too.

A bit further up, there is also:
AFLAGS_sram242x.o                      :=-Wa,-march=armv6
AFLAGS_sram243x.o                      :=-Wa,-march=armv6

I think those explicit arch definitions are not even necessary since
ARCH_OMAP2 depends on ARCH_MULTI_V6, which cannot be built with pre v6
architecture. So the minimum architecture we build for will be armv6...

In a quick test omap2plus_defconfig builds fine without those AFLAGS. I
will put it through some more testing and drop those flags in v3.

--
Stefan


> 
> Regards,
> 
> Tony