[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <314d34d9-efe1-fd10-222f-3f9b3bce82da@csgroup.eu>
Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2022 15:46:29 +0000
From: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@...roup.eu>
To: Sathvika Vasireddy <sv@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Sathvika Vasireddy <sv@...ux.ibm.com>,
"linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org" <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>
CC: "jpoimboe@...hat.com" <jpoimboe@...hat.com>,
"peterz@...radead.org" <peterz@...radead.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"aik@...abs.ru" <aik@...abs.ru>,
"mpe@...erman.id.au" <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
"mingo@...hat.com" <mingo@...hat.com>,
"rostedt@...dmis.org" <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
"naveen.n.rao@...ux.vnet.ibm.com" <naveen.n.rao@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
"mbenes@...e.cz" <mbenes@...e.cz>,
"benh@...nel.crashing.org" <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
"paulus@...ba.org" <paulus@...ba.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v3 11/12] powerpc: Remove unreachable() from WARN_ON()
Le 27/06/2022 à 17:35, Sathvika Vasireddy a écrit :
>
> On 25/06/22 12:16, Christophe Leroy wrote:
>>
>> Le 24/06/2022 à 20:32, Sathvika Vasireddy a écrit :
>>> objtool is throwing *unannotated intra-function call*
>>> warnings with a few instructions that are marked
>>> unreachable. Remove unreachable() from WARN_ON()
>>> to fix these warnings, as the codegen remains same
>>> with and without unreachable() in WARN_ON().
>> Did you try the two exemples described in commit 1e688dd2a3d6
>> ("powerpc/bug: Provide better flexibility to WARN_ON/__WARN_FLAGS() with
>> asm goto") ?
>>
>> Without your patch:
>>
>> 00000640 <test>:
>> 640: 81 23 00 84 lwz r9,132(r3)
>> 644: 71 29 40 00 andi. r9,r9,16384
>> 648: 40 82 00 0c bne 654 <test+0x14>
>> 64c: 80 63 00 0c lwz r3,12(r3)
>> 650: 4e 80 00 20 blr
>> 654: 0f e0 00 00 twui r0,0
>>
>> 00000658 <test9w>:
>> 658: 2c 04 00 00 cmpwi r4,0
>> 65c: 41 82 00 0c beq 668 <test9w+0x10>
>> 660: 7c 63 23 96 divwu r3,r3,r4
>> 664: 4e 80 00 20 blr
>> 668: 0f e0 00 00 twui r0,0
>> 66c: 38 60 00 00 li r3,0
>> 670: 4e 80 00 20 blr
>>
>>
>> With your patch:
>>
>> 00000640 <test>:
>> 640: 81 23 00 84 lwz r9,132(r3)
>> 644: 71 29 40 00 andi. r9,r9,16384
>> 648: 40 82 00 0c bne 654 <test+0x14>
>> 64c: 80 63 00 0c lwz r3,12(r3)
>> 650: 4e 80 00 20 blr
>> 654: 0f e0 00 00 twui r0,0
>> 658: 4b ff ff f4 b 64c <test+0xc> <==
>>
>> 0000065c <test9w>:
>> 65c: 2c 04 00 00 cmpwi r4,0
>> 660: 41 82 00 0c beq 66c <test9w+0x10>
>> 664: 7c 63 23 96 divwu r3,r3,r4
>> 668: 4e 80 00 20 blr
>> 66c: 0f e0 00 00 twui r0,0
>> 670: 38 60 00 00 li r3,0 <==
>> 674: 4e 80 00 20 blr <==
>> 678: 38 60 00 00 li r3,0
>> 67c: 4e 80 00 20 blr
>>
> The builtin variant of unreachable (__builtin_unreachable()) works.
>
> How about using that instead of unreachable() ?
>
That seems odd.
Look at linux/compiler.h
It seems like unreachable() exists to help objtool.
Christophe
Powered by blists - more mailing lists