[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <c0f0eb7e-9e46-10cc-1277-b37fcd48d0be@arm.com>
Date: Tue, 8 Oct 2019 17:18:53 +0100
From: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>
To: Sami Tolvanen <samitolvanen@...gle.com>,
Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>
Cc: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
clang-built-linux <clang-built-linux@...glegroups.com>,
Andrew Murray <andrew.murray@....com>,
Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64: lse: fix LSE atomics with LLVM's integrated
assembler
On 08/10/2019 16:22, Sami Tolvanen wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 7, 2019 at 2:46 PM 'Nick Desaulniers' via Clang Built
> Linux <clang-built-linux@...glegroups.com> wrote:
>> I'm worried that one of these might lower to LSE atomics without
>> ALTERNATIVE guards by blanketing all C code with `-march=armv8-a+lse`.
>
> True, that's a valid concern. I think adding the directive to each
> assembly block is the way forward then, assuming the maintainers are
> fine with that.
It's definitely a valid concern in principle, but in practice note that
lse.h ends up included in ~99% of C files, so the extension is enabled
more or less everywhere already.
(based on a quick hack involving '#pragma message' and grepping the
build logs)
Robin.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists