Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1686919
| From | Matthias Kaehlcke <mka@chromium.org> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH] Revert "x86/uaccess: Add stack frame output operand in get_user() inline asm" |
| Date | 2017-07-13 23:20 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <u2TGF-2pl-1@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | (5 earlier) <u2zeW-6fP-17@gated-at.bofh.it> <u2QIO-ye-11@gated-at.bofh.it> <u2Rlv-Ow-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <u2SUi-1Tu-21@gated-at.bofh.it> <u2T3Z-1WG-25@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
El Thu, Jul 13, 2017 at 03:34:16PM -0500 Josh Poimboeuf ha dit:
> On Thu, Jul 13, 2017 at 11:20:04PM +0300, Andrey Rybainin wrote:
> > On 07/13/2017 09:47 PM, Matthias Kaehlcke wrote:
> >
> > > Thanks for your analysis!
> > >
> > >> What happens if you try the below patch instead of the revert? Any
> > >> chance the offending instruction goes away?
> > >>
> > >> diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/uaccess.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/uaccess.h
> > >> index 11433f9..beac907 100644
> > >> --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/uaccess.h
> > >> +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/uaccess.h
> > >> @@ -171,7 +171,7 @@ __typeof__(__builtin_choose_expr(sizeof(x) > sizeof(0UL), 0ULL, 0UL))
> > >> might_fault(); \
> > >> asm volatile("call __get_user_%P4" \
> > >> : "=a" (__ret_gu), "=r" (__val_gu), "+r" (__sp) \
> > >> - : "0" (ptr), "i" (sizeof(*(ptr)))); \
> > >> + : "0" (ptr), "i" (sizeof(*(ptr))), "r" (__sp)); \
> > >> (x) = (__force __typeof__(*(ptr))) __val_gu; \
> > >> __builtin_expect(__ret_gu, 0); \
> > >> })
> > >
> > > The generated code is basically the same, only that now the value from
> > > the stack is stored in a register and written twice to RSP:
> > >
> >
> > AFAIR clang works much better with global named registers.
> > Could you check if the patch bellow helps?
>
> And yet another one to try (clobbering sp) :-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/uaccess.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/uaccess.h
> index 11433f9..21f0c39 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/uaccess.h
> +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/uaccess.h
> @@ -166,12 +166,12 @@ __typeof__(__builtin_choose_expr(sizeof(x) > sizeof(0UL), 0ULL, 0UL))
> ({ \
> int __ret_gu; \
> register __inttype(*(ptr)) __val_gu asm("%"_ASM_DX); \
> - register void *__sp asm(_ASM_SP); \
> __chk_user_ptr(ptr); \
> might_fault(); \
> - asm volatile("call __get_user_%P4" \
> - : "=a" (__ret_gu), "=r" (__val_gu), "+r" (__sp) \
> - : "0" (ptr), "i" (sizeof(*(ptr)))); \
> + asm volatile("call __get_user_%P3" \
> + : "=a" (__ret_gu), "=r" (__val_gu) \
> + : "0" (ptr), "i" (sizeof(*(ptr))) \
> + : "sp"); \
> (x) = (__force __typeof__(*(ptr))) __val_gu; \
> __builtin_expect(__ret_gu, 0); \
> })
This compiles with both gcc and clang, clang does not corrupt the
stack pointer. I wouldn't be able to tell though if it forces a stack
frame if it doesn't already exist, as the original patch intends.
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
[PATCH] Revert "x86/uaccess: Add stack frame output operand in get_user() inline asm" Matthias Kaehlcke <mka@chromium.org> - 2017-07-12 23:30 +0200
Re: [PATCH] Revert "x86/uaccess: Add stack frame output operand in get_user() inline asm" Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com> - 2017-07-13 00:20 +0200
Re: [PATCH] Revert "x86/uaccess: Add stack frame output operand in get_user() inline asm" Matthias Kaehlcke <mka@chromium.org> - 2017-07-13 00:30 +0200
Re: [PATCH] Revert "x86/uaccess: Add stack frame output operand in get_user() inline asm" Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com> - 2017-07-13 00:40 +0200
Re: [PATCH] Revert "x86/uaccess: Add stack frame output operand in get_user() inline asm" Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com> - 2017-07-13 00:40 +0200
Re: [PATCH] Revert "x86/uaccess: Add stack frame output operand in get_user() inline asm" Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com> - 2017-07-13 20:10 +0200
Re: [PATCH] Revert "x86/uaccess: Add stack frame output operand in get_user() inline asm" Matthias Kaehlcke <mka@chromium.org> - 2017-07-13 20:50 +0200
Re: [PATCH] Revert "x86/uaccess: Add stack frame output operand in get_user() inline asm" Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com> - 2017-07-13 21:30 +0200
Re: [PATCH] Revert "x86/uaccess: Add stack frame output operand in get_user() inline asm" Michael Davidson <md@google.com> - 2017-07-13 21:40 +0200
Re: [PATCH] Revert "x86/uaccess: Add stack frame output operand in get_user() inline asm" Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com> - 2017-07-13 22:20 +0200
Re: [PATCH] Revert "x86/uaccess: Add stack frame output operand in get_user() inline asm" Andrey Rybainin <ryabinin.a.a@gmail.com> - 2017-07-13 22:30 +0200
Re: [PATCH] Revert "x86/uaccess: Add stack frame output operand in get_user() inline asm" Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com> - 2017-07-13 22:40 +0200
Re: [PATCH] Revert "x86/uaccess: Add stack frame output operand in get_user() inline asm" Matthias Kaehlcke <mka@chromium.org> - 2017-07-13 23:20 +0200
Re: [PATCH] Revert "x86/uaccess: Add stack frame output operand in get_user() inline asm" Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com> - 2017-07-13 23:40 +0200
Re: [PATCH] Revert "x86/uaccess: Add stack frame output operand in get_user() inline asm" Matthias Kaehlcke <mka@chromium.org> - 2017-07-14 00:00 +0200
Re: [PATCH] Revert "x86/uaccess: Add stack frame output operand in get_user() inline asm" Matthias Kaehlcke <mka@chromium.org> - 2017-07-13 23:20 +0200
Re: [PATCH] Revert "x86/uaccess: Add stack frame output operand in get_user() inline asm" Andrey Rybainin <ryabinin.a.a@gmail.com> - 2017-07-13 23:30 +0200
Re: [PATCH] Revert "x86/uaccess: Add stack frame output operand in get_user() inline asm" Matthias Kaehlcke <mka@chromium.org> - 2017-07-13 23:50 +0200
Re: [PATCH] Revert "x86/uaccess: Add stack frame output operand in get_user() inline asm" Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com> - 2017-07-14 00:00 +0200
csiph-web