On Thu, Jul 20, 2023 at 11:31:13AM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 12, 2023 at 12:02:30PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> > + /*
> > + * This is a memset() but we don't want the compiler to
> > + * optimise it into either instructions or a library call
> > + * which might be incompatible with streaming mode.
> > + */
> > + for (i = 0; i < td->live_sz; i++) {
> > + asm volatile("nop"
> > + : "+m" (*dest_uc)
> > + :
> > + : "memory");
> I don't think it's save to use "+m" here, since the compiler can assume
> that the address is used exactly once in the asm. If a post-indexed
> addressing mode is generated, then you can end up with register corruption.
> Stepping back, why not use either barrier() or OPTIMIZER_HIDE_VAR()
> instead?
That should work. I was mostly just open coding OPTIMIZER_HIDE_VAR()
and noticed that memory constraints were a thing.
> The most robust fix would be to write all of the streaming mode code in
> asm, but I can appreciate that's a tonne of work for a testcase.
It's probably more proportionate to add a dependency on toolchain
support for SME, but that'd mean we hardly ever run the tests.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
