[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAHk-=whc3Uvhrmrr27xp5=oOhSDjXc5s1ZxC3B7xMYV6oj4WRQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 17 Jul 2022 07:44:22 -0700
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Sudip Mukherjee <sudipm.mukherjee@...il.com>
Cc: Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
linuxppc-dev <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: mainline build failure of powerpc allmodconfig for prom_init_check
On Sun, Jul 17, 2022 at 2:13 AM Sudip Mukherjee
<sudipm.mukherjee@...il.com> wrote:
>
> I was trying to check it. With gcc-11 the assembly code generated is
> not using memset, but using __memset.
> But with gcc-12, I can see the assembly code is using memset. One
> example from the assembly:
You could try making the 'args' array in 'struct prom_args' be marked
'volatile'.
Ie something like this:
--- a/arch/powerpc/kernel/prom_init.c
+++ b/arch/powerpc/kernel/prom_init.c
@@ -115,6 +115,6 @@ struct prom_args {
__be32 service;
__be32 nargs;
__be32 nret;
- __be32 args[10];
+ volatile __be32 args[10];
};
because I think it's just the compilers turning the small loop over
those fields into a "memset()".
Linus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists