[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <df9590bc-1a61-28c0-55eb-9f9539d03144@huawei.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2022 19:56:25 +0800
From: Chen Zhongjin <chenzhongjin@...wei.com>
To: Guo Ren <guoren@...nel.org>
CC: <arnd@...db.de>, <palmer@...osinc.com>, <tglx@...utronix.de>,
<peterz@...radead.org>, <luto@...nel.org>,
<conor.dooley@...rochip.com>, <heiko@...ech.de>,
<jszhang@...nel.org>, <lazyparser@...il.com>, <falcon@...ylab.org>,
<chenhuacai@...nel.org>, <apatel@...tanamicro.com>,
<atishp@...shpatra.org>, <palmer@...belt.com>,
<paul.walmsley@...ive.com>, <mark.rutland@....com>,
<zouyipeng@...wei.com>, <bigeasy@...utronix.de>,
<David.Laight@...lab.com>, <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org>,
Guo Ren <guoren@...ux.alibaba.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V5 08/11] riscv: Support HAVE_IRQ_EXIT_ON_IRQ_STACK
Hi,
Sorry to bother again, I just finished the test with your patches on
mine patch set.
On 2022/9/21 17:53, Guo Ren wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 21, 2022 at 4:34 PM Chen Zhongjin <chenzhongjin@...wei.com> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On 2022/9/18 23:52, guoren@...nel.org wrote:
>>> diff --git a/arch/riscv/kernel/entry.S b/arch/riscv/kernel/entry.S
>>> index 5f49517cd3a2..426529b84db0 100644
>>> --- a/arch/riscv/kernel/entry.S
>>> +++ b/arch/riscv/kernel/entry.S
>>> @@ -332,6 +332,33 @@ ENTRY(ret_from_kernel_thread)
>>> tail syscall_exit_to_user_mode
>>> ENDPROC(ret_from_kernel_thread)
>>>
>>> +#ifdef CONFIG_IRQ_STACKS
>>> +ENTRY(call_on_stack)
>>> + /* Create a frame record to save our ra and fp */
>>> + addi sp, sp, -RISCV_SZPTR
>>> + REG_S ra, (sp)
>>> + addi sp, sp, -RISCV_SZPTR
>>> + REG_S fp, (sp)
>>> +
>>> + /* Save sp in fp */
>>> + move fp, sp
>>> +
Considering that s0 points to previous sp normally, I think here we
should have 'addi fp, sp, 2*RISCV_SZPTR'.
An example below:
addi sp, sp, -16
sd ra, 8(sp)
sd s0, 0(sp)
addi s0, sp, 16 <- s0 is set to previous sp
...
ld ra,8(sp)
ld s0,0(sp)
addi sp,sp,16
So maybe it's better to save the stack frame as below:
addi sp, sp, -2*RISCV_SZPTR
REG_S ra, RISCV_SZPTR(sp)
REG_S s0, (sp)
/* Save sp in fp */
addi s0, sp, 2*RISCV_SZPTR
...
/*
* Restore sp from prev fp, and fp, ra from the frame
*/
addi sp, s0, -2*RISCV_SZPTR
REG_L ra, RISCV_SZPTR(sp)
REG_L s0, (sp)
addi sp, sp, 2*RISCV_SZPTR
Anyway, lets set fp as sp + 2 * RISCV_SZPTR, so that unwinder can
connect two stacks same as normal function.
I tested this with my patch and the unwinder works properly.
Thanks for your time!
Best,
Chen
>>> + /* Move to the new stack and call the function there */
>>> + li a3, IRQ_STACK_SIZE
>>> + add sp, a1, a3
>>> + jalr a2
>>> +
>>> + /*
>>> + * Restore sp from prev fp, and fp, ra from the frame
>>> + */
>>> + move sp, fp
>>> + REG_L fp, (sp)
>>> + addi sp, sp, RISCV_SZPTR
>>> + REG_L ra, (sp)
>>> + addi sp, sp, RISCV_SZPTR
>>> + ret
>>> +ENDPROC(call_on_stack)
>>> +#endif
>> Seems my compiler (riscv64-linux-gnu-gcc 8.4.0, cross compiling from
>> x86) cannot recognize the register `fp`.
> The whole entry.S uses s0 instead of fp, so I approve of your advice. Thx.
>
>> After I changed it to `s0` this can pass compiling.
>>
>>
>> Seems there is nowhere else using `fp`, can this just using `s0` instead?
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Chen
>>
>>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists