linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 5.4-rc1 BUILD FIX] s390: mark __cpacf_query() as __always

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]

Date:   Wed, 2 Oct 2019 10:21:57 +0200
From:   Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>
To:     Michal Kubecek <mkubecek@...e.cz>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Jiri Kosina <jikos@...nel.org>,
        Vasily Gorbik <gor@...ux.ibm.com>,
        Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>,
        Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        linux-s390@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5.4-rc1 BUILD FIX] s390: mark __cpacf_query() as
 __always_inline

On Wed, Oct 02, 2019 at 09:03:33AM +0200, Michal Kubecek wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 02, 2019 at 08:46:05AM +0200, Heiko Carstens wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 01, 2019 at 10:08:01PM +0200, Jiri Kosina wrote:
> > > 
> > >    In file included from arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c:44:
> > >    ./arch/s390/include/asm/cpacf.h: In function '__cpacf_query':
> > >    ./arch/s390/include/asm/cpacf.h:179:2: warning: asm operand 3 probably doesn't match constraints
> > >      179 |  asm volatile(
> > >          |  ^~~
> > >    ./arch/s390/include/asm/cpacf.h:179:2: error: impossible constraint in 'asm'
> > > 
> > > ...
> > > 
> > > I am wondering how is it possible that none of the build-testing 
> > > infrastructure we have running against linux-next caught this? Not enough 
> > > non-x86 coverage?
> > 
> > Well, there is plenty of s390 coverage with respect to daily builds
> > (also here). It doesn't fail for me with gcc 9.1; so you may either
> > have a different gcc version or different config options(?) so the
> > compiler decided to not inline the function.
> 
> I think I found the reason: we only hit the build failure with one
> special config used for zfcpdump which has
> 
>   CONFIG_CC_OPTIMIZE_FOR_SIZE=y
> 
> When I switched to CONFIG_CC_OPTIMIZE_FOR_PERFORMANCE=y (which we have
> in other s390x configs and which most people probably prefer), the build
> does not fail even without the patch.

Yes, with CONFIG_CC_OPTIMIZE_FOR_SIZE=y I can see plenty of _additional_
compile failures on s390 with "defconfig". Will fix them all...

Thanks for reporting!