[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <836018684.1056.1555601516134.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2019 11:31:56 -0400 (EDT)
From: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>
To: Alan Modra <amodra@...il.com>
Cc: Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
Carlos O'Donell <codonell@...hat.com>,
Tulio Magno Quites Machado Filho <tuliom@...ii.art.br>,
Florian Weimer <fweimer@...hat.com>,
Michael Meissner <meissner@...ux.ibm.com>,
Peter Bergner <bergner@...t.ibm.com>,
Paul Burton <paul.burton@...s.com>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>,
heiko carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>,
gor <gor@...ux.ibm.com>, schwidefsky <schwidefsky@...ibm.com>,
"Russell King, ARM Linux" <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>, carlos <carlos@...hat.com>,
Joseph Myers <joseph@...esourcery.com>,
Szabolcs Nagy <szabolcs.nagy@....com>,
libc-alpha <libc-alpha@...rceware.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ben Maurer <bmaurer@...com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Dave Watson <davejwatson@...com>, Paul Turner <pjt@...gle.com>,
Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-api <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] glibc: Perform rseq(2) registration at C startup
and thread creation (v7)
----- On Apr 9, 2019, at 5:29 AM, Alan Modra amodra@...il.com wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 09, 2019 at 02:23:53PM +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote:
>> I'd much rather we use a trap with a specific immediate value. Otherwise
>> someone's going to waste time one day puzzling over why userspace is
>> doing mtmsr.
>
> It's data. We have other data in executable sections. Anyone who
> wonders about odd disassembly just hasn't realized they are
> disassembling data.
>
>> It would also complicate things if we ever wanted to emulate mtmsr.
>
> No, because it won't be executed. If I understand correctly, the only
> reason to choose an illegal, trap or privileged insn is to halt
> execution earlier rather than later when a program goes off in the
> weeds.
>
>> If we want something that is a trap rather than a nop then use 0x0fe50553.
>>
>> That's "compare the value in r5 with 0x553 and then trap unconditionally".
>>
>> It shows up in objdump as:
>>
>> 10000000: 53 05 e5 0f twui r5,1363
>>
>>
>> The immediate can be anything, I chose that value to mimic the x86 value
>> Mathieu mentioned.
>>
>> There's no reason that instruction would ever be generated because the
>> immediate value serves no purpose. So it satisfies the "very unlikely
>> to appear" criteria AFAICS.
>
> Yes, looks fine to me, except that in VLE mode (do we care?)
> ".long 0x0fe50553" disassembles as
> 0: 0f e5 se_cmphl r5,r30
> 2: 05 53 se_mullw r3,r5
> No illegal/trap/privileged insn there.
>
> ".long 0x0fe5000b" might be better to cover VLE.
Can you share with us the objdump output of ".long 0x0fe5000b" in
VLE mode ? VLE mode support does not appear to be available in typical
toolchains. Also, is VLE mode only for powerpc 32 be, or also for
powerpc 64 be/le ?
Thanks,
Mathieu
--
Mathieu Desnoyers
EfficiOS Inc.
http://www.efficios.com
Powered by blists - more mailing lists