[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <mhng-8e6926b7-c690-4398-a70a-072b11d7e6fa@palmer-ri-x1c9>
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2022 15:15:26 -0800 (PST)
From: Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>
To: kernel@...il.dk
CC: linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org, kernel@...il.dk,
Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>,
aou@...s.berkeley.edu, peterz@...radead.org, jpoimboe@...hat.com,
jbaron@...mai.com, rostedt@...dmis.org, ardb@...nel.org,
alex@...ti.fr, jszhang@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/7] Module relocation fixes and asm/insn.h header
On Mon, 31 Jan 2022 10:27:13 PST (-0800), kernel@...il.dk wrote:
> Apologies! I messed up v1. Please consider this patch set only.
>
> The first patch removes a bunch of code from the asm/module.h which is
> included in almost all drivers through linux/module.h. Next are two
> patches to fix unaligned access when doing module relocations and do
> proper range checks for auipc+jalr offsets.
>
> I'm a little less confident about the following patches, so consider
> this more of an RFC for those. The idea is to consolidate the RISC-V
> instruction generation and manipulation similar to arm64's asm/insn.h
> header.
>
> /Emil
>
> Emil Renner Berthing (7):
> riscv: Remove unneeded definitions from asm/module.h
> riscv: Avoid unaligned access when relocating modules
> riscv: Fix auipc+jalr relocation range checks
> riscv: Add asm/insn.h header
> riscv: Use asm/insn.h for module relocations
> riscv: Use asm/insn.h to generate plt entries
> riscv: Use asm/insn.h for jump labels
>
> arch/riscv/include/asm/insn.h | 121 ++++++++++++++
> arch/riscv/include/asm/module.h | 87 ----------
> arch/riscv/kernel/jump_label.c | 12 +-
> arch/riscv/kernel/module-sections.c | 71 +++++++++
> arch/riscv/kernel/module.c | 237 +++++++++++++---------------
> 5 files changed, 306 insertions(+), 222 deletions(-)
> create mode 100644 arch/riscv/include/asm/insn.h
These generally look good to me, though there's a lot of bit-field
twiddling so I'll take another look before merging it. There's a
handful of minor issues:
* There's a fix in here, mixed into the cleanups. It's generally best
to split those out.
* There's another copy of the insn patterns in our BPF JIT, it'd be nice
to clean that up too. That can be a follow-on, though.
* It's 2022, but there's some 2020 copyrights. If this really is old
stuff that's OK, I just wanted to check.
I'm usually OK just re-ordering patches myself, but I figured I'd have
to ask about the copyright dates anyway. LMK if you want to send a v2
with the fix pulled to the front, and what you want me to do about the
copyright dates (if you're going to send a v2 then just fix them, but if
you're not then just telling me is OK).
Thanks!
Powered by blists - more mailing lists