On Sat, 10 Oct 2020 16:02:10 +0200
Vasily Gorbik <gor@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 09, 2020 at 10:49:21PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 09, 2020 at 10:38:22PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > On Wed, Oct 07, 2020 at 04:20:19PM -0000, tip-bot2 for Martin Schwidefsky wrote:
> > > > The following commit has been merged into the objtool/core branch of tip:
> > > >
> > > > Commit-ID: 2a522b53c47051d3bf98748418f4f8e5f20d2c04
> > > > Gitweb: https://git.kernel.org/tip/2a522b53c47051d3bf98748418f4f8e5f20d2c04
> > > >
> > > > x86/insn: Support big endian cross-compiles
> > >
> > > This commit breaks the x86 build with CONFIG_X86_DECODER_SELFTEST=y.
> > >
> > > I've asked Boris to truncate tip/objtool/core.
> >
> > Yeah, top 4 are gone until this is resolved.
> >
> > What I would suggest is to have a look at how tools/ headers are kept
> > separate from kernel proper ones, see tools/include/ and how those
> > headers there are full of dummy definitions just so it builds.
> >
> > And then including a global one like linux/kernel.h is just looking for
> > trouble:
> >
> > In file included from ./include/uapi/linux/byteorder/little_endian.h:12,
> > from ./include/linux/byteorder/little_endian.h:5,
> > from /usr/include/x86_64-linux-gnu/asm/byteorder.h:5,
> > from ./arch/x86/include/asm/insn.h:10,
> > from arch/x86/tools/insn_sanity.c:21:
> > ./tools/include/linux/types.h:30:18: error: conflicting types for ‘u64’
> > 30 | typedef uint64_t u64;
>
> Sigh... I have not realized there are more usages of insn.c which are
> conditionally compiled. It's not like you grep *.c files to find who
> includes them regularity.
Yes, x86 insn library code is used for the sanity check tool too.
>
> Looks like there is no way to find common byte swapping helpers for
> the kernel and tools then. Even though tools provide quite a bunch of
> them in tools/include/. So, completely avoiding mixing "kernel" and
> "userspace" headers would look like the following (delta to commit
> mentioned above):
> ---
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/insn.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/insn.h
> index 004e27bdf121..68197fe18a11 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/insn.h
> +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/insn.h
> @@ -7,7 +7,13 @@
> * Copyright (C) IBM Corporation, 2009
> */
>
> +#ifdef __KERNEL__
> #include <asm/byteorder.h>
> +#define insn_cpu_to_le32 cpu_to_le32
> +#else
> +#include <endian.h>
> +#define insn_cpu_to_le32 htole32
> +#endif
> /* insn_attr_t is defined in inat.h */
> #include <asm/inat.h>
>
> @@ -47,7 +53,7 @@ static inline void insn_field_set(struct insn_field *p, insn_value_t v,
> unsigned char n)
> {
> p->value = v;
> - p->little = __cpu_to_le32(v);
> + p->little = insn_cpu_to_le32(v);
> p->nbytes = n;
> }
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/lib/insn.c b/arch/x86/lib/insn.c
> index 520b31fc1f1a..003f32ff7798 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/lib/insn.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/lib/insn.c
> @@ -5,7 +5,6 @@
> * Copyright (C) IBM Corporation, 2002, 2004, 2009
> */
>
> -#include <linux/kernel.h>
> #ifdef __KERNEL__
> #include <linux/string.h>
> #else
> @@ -16,15 +15,23 @@
>
> #include <asm/emulate_prefix.h>
>
> +#ifdef __KERNEL__
> +#define insn_le32_to_cpu le32_to_cpu
> +#define insn_le16_to_cpu le16_to_cpu
> +#else
> +#define insn_le32_to_cpu le32toh
> +#define insn_le16_to_cpu le16toh
> +#endif
> +
> #define leXX_to_cpu(t, r) \
> ({ \
> __typeof__(t) v; \
> switch (sizeof(t)) { \
> - case 4: v = le32_to_cpu(r); break; \
> - case 2: v = le16_to_cpu(r); break; \
> + case 4: v = insn_le32_to_cpu(r); break; \
> + case 2: v = insn_le16_to_cpu(r); break; \
> case 1: v = r; break; \
> - default: \
> - BUILD_BUG(); break; \
> + default: /* relying on -Wuninitialized to report this */ \
> + break; \
> } \
> v; \
> })
> --
> And the same for the tools/*
> No linux/kernel.h means no BUILD_BUG(), but -Wuninitialized actually
> does a decent job in this case:
> arch/x86/../../../arch/x86/lib/insn.c:605:37: error: variable 'v' is
> uninitialized when used here [-Werror,-Wuninitialized]
> insn_field_set(&insn->immediate2, get_next(long, insn), 1);
> ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Can you initialize v with 0 ? Anyway it will be optimized out while
compiling the code.
>
> Masami, Josh,
> would that be acceptable?
Yes.
Thank you,
--
Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@xxxxxxxxxx>
|