[PATCH v2 2/2] powerpc/bug: Provide better flexibility to WARN_ON/__WARN_FLAGS() with asm goto

Nathan Chancellor nathan at kernel.org
Fri Aug 27 04:54:17 AEST 2021


On Thu, Aug 26, 2021 at 01:21:39PM +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> Nathan Chancellor <nathan at kernel.org> writes:
> > On Tue, Apr 13, 2021 at 04:38:10PM +0000, Christophe Leroy wrote:
> >> Using asm goto in __WARN_FLAGS() and WARN_ON() allows more
> >> flexibility to GCC.
> ...
> >
> > This patch as commit 1e688dd2a3d6 ("powerpc/bug: Provide better
> > flexibility to WARN_ON/__WARN_FLAGS() with asm goto") cause a WARN_ON in
> > klist_add_tail to trigger over and over on boot when compiling with
> > clang:
> >
> > [    2.177416][    T1] WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 1 at lib/klist.c:62 .klist_add_tail+0x3c/0x110
> > [    2.177456][    T1] Modules linked in:
> > [    2.177481][    T1] CPU: 0 PID: 1 Comm: swapper/0 Tainted: G        W         5.14.0-rc7-next-20210825 #1
> > [    2.177520][    T1] NIP:  c0000000007ff81c LR: c00000000090a038 CTR: 0000000000000000
> > [    2.177557][    T1] REGS: c0000000073c32a0 TRAP: 0700   Tainted: G        W          (5.14.0-rc7-next-20210825)
> > [    2.177593][    T1] MSR:  8000000002029032 <SF,VEC,EE,ME,IR,DR,RI>  CR: 22000a40  XER: 00000000
> > [    2.177667][    T1] CFAR: c00000000090a034 IRQMASK: 0
> > [    2.177667][    T1] GPR00: c00000000090a038 c0000000073c3540 c000000001be3200 0000000000000001
> > [    2.177667][    T1] GPR04: c0000000072d65c0 0000000000000000 c0000000091ba798 c0000000091bb0a0
> > [    2.177667][    T1] GPR08: 0000000000000001 0000000000000000 c000000008581918 fffffffffffffc00
> > [    2.177667][    T1] GPR12: 0000000044000240 c000000001dd0000 c000000000012300 0000000000000000
> > [    2.177667][    T1] GPR16: 0000000000000000 0000000000000000 0000000000000000 0000000000000000
> > [    2.177667][    T1] GPR20: 0000000000000000 0000000000000000 0000000000000000 0000000000000000
> > [    2.177667][    T1] GPR24: 0000000000000000 c0000000017e3200 0000000000000000 c000000001a0e778
> > [    2.177667][    T1] GPR28: c0000000072d65b0 c0000000072d65a8 c000000007de72c8 c0000000073c35d0
> > [    2.178019][    T1] NIP [c0000000007ff81c] .klist_add_tail+0x3c/0x110
> > [    2.178058][    T1] LR [c00000000090a038] .bus_add_driver+0x148/0x290
> > [    2.178088][    T1] Call Trace:
> > [    2.178105][    T1] [c0000000073c3540] [c0000000073c35d0] 0xc0000000073c35d0 (unreliable)
> > [    2.178150][    T1] [c0000000073c35d0] [c00000000090a038] .bus_add_driver+0x148/0x290
> > [    2.178190][    T1] [c0000000073c3670] [c00000000090fae8] .driver_register+0xb8/0x190
> > [    2.178234][    T1] [c0000000073c3700] [c000000000be55c0] .__hid_register_driver+0x70/0xd0
> > [    2.178275][    T1] [c0000000073c37a0] [c00000000116955c] .redragon_driver_init+0x34/0x58
> > [    2.178314][    T1] [c0000000073c3820] [c000000000011ae0] .do_one_initcall+0x130/0x3b0
> > [    2.178357][    T1] [c0000000073c3bb0] [c0000000011065e0] .do_initcall_level+0xd8/0x188
> > [    2.178403][    T1] [c0000000073c3c50] [c0000000011064a8] .do_initcalls+0x7c/0xdc
> > [    2.178445][    T1] [c0000000073c3ce0] [c000000001106238] .kernel_init_freeable+0x178/0x21c
> > [    2.178491][    T1] [c0000000073c3d90] [c000000000012334] .kernel_init+0x34/0x220
> > [    2.178530][    T1] [c0000000073c3e10] [c00000000000cf50] .ret_from_kernel_thread+0x58/0x60
> > [    2.178569][    T1] Instruction dump:
> > [    2.178592][    T1] fba10078 7c7d1b78 38600001 fb810070 3b9d0008 fbc10080 7c9e2378 389d0018
> > [    2.178662][    T1] fb9d0008 fb9d0010 90640000 fbdd0000 <0b1e0000> e87e0018 28230000 41820024
> > [    2.178728][    T1] ---[ end trace 52ed3431f58f1847 ]---
> >
> > Is this a bug with clang or is there something wrong with the patch? The
> > vmlinux image is available at [1] if you want to inspect it and our QEMU
> > command and the warning at boot can be viewed at [2]. If there is any
> > other information I can provide, please let me know.
> >
> > [1] https://builds.tuxbuild.com/1xDcmp3Tvno0TTGxDVPedRKIKM2/
> > [2] https://github.com/ClangBuiltLinux/continuous-integration2/commit/cee159b66a58eb57fa2359e7888074b9da24126c/checks/3422232736/logs
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> This is the generated assembly:
> 
> c0000000007ff600 <.klist_add_tail>:
> c0000000007ff600:       7c 08 02 a6     mflr    r0
> c0000000007ff604:       f8 01 00 10     std     r0,16(r1)
> c0000000007ff608:       f8 21 ff 71     stdu    r1,-144(r1)	^ prolog
> c0000000007ff60c:       fb a1 00 78     std     r29,120(r1)	save r29 to stack
> c0000000007ff610:       7c 7d 1b 78     mr      r29,r3		r29 = struct klist_node *n
> c0000000007ff614:       38 60 00 01     li      r3,1		r3 = 1
> c0000000007ff618:       fb 81 00 70     std     r28,112(r1)	save r28 to stack
> c0000000007ff61c:       3b 9d 00 08     addi    r28,r29,8	r28 = &n->n_node
> c0000000007ff620:       fb c1 00 80     std     r30,128(r1)	save r30 to stack
> c0000000007ff624:       7c 9e 23 78     mr      r30,r4		r30 = struct klist *k
> c0000000007ff628:       38 9d 00 18     addi    r4,r29,24	r4 = &n->n_ref
> c0000000007ff62c:       fb 9d 00 08     std     r28,8(r29)	n->n_node.next = &n->n_node	INIT_LIST_HEAD
> c0000000007ff630:       fb 9d 00 10     std     r28,16(r29)	n->n_node.prev = &n->n_node
> c0000000007ff634:       90 64 00 00     stw     r3,0(r4)	kref_init(&n->n_ref)
> c0000000007ff638:       fb dd 00 00     std     r30,0(r29)	n->n_klist = k
> c0000000007ff63c:       0b 1e 00 00     tdnei   r30,0		trap if r30 (k) is not zero
> 
> 
> From:
> 
> static void knode_set_klist(struct klist_node *knode, struct klist *klist)
> {
> 	knode->n_klist = klist;
> 	/* no knode deserves to start its life dead */
> 	WARN_ON(knode_dead(knode));
>                 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> }
> 
> Which expands to:
> 
> static void knode_set_klist(struct klist_node *knode, struct klist *klist)
> {
> 	knode->n_klist = klist;
> 
> 	({
> 		bool __ret_warn_on = false;
> 		do {
>                 ...
> 			} else {
> 				__label__ __label_warn_on;
> 				do {
> 					asm goto(
> 						"1:   "
> 						"tdnei"
> 						"
> 						" " % 4,
> 						0 " "\n " ".section __ex_table,\"a\";"
> 										" "
> 										".balign 4;"
> 										" "
> 										".long (1b) - . ;"
> 										" "
> 										".long (%l[__label_warn_on]) - . ;"
> 										" "
> 										".previous"
> 										" "
> 										".section __bug_table,\"aw\"\n"
> 										"2:\t.4byte 1b - 2b, %0 - 2b\n"
> 										"\t.short %1, %2\n"
> 										".org 2b+%3\n"
> 										".previous\n"
> 						:
> 						: "i"("lib/klist.c"), "i"(62),
> 						  "i"((1 << 0) | ((9) << 8)),
> 						  "i"(sizeof(struct bug_entry)),
> 						  "r"(knode_dead(knode))
>                                                   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> 
> 						:
> 						: __label_warn_on);
> 					asm("");
> 				} while (0);
> 				break;
> 			__label_warn_on:
> 				__ret_warn_on = true;
> 			}
> 		} while (0);
> 		__builtin_expect(!!(__ret_warn_on), 0);
> 	});
> }
> 
> And knode_dead is:
> 
> #define KNODE_DEAD		1LU
> 
> static bool knode_dead(struct klist_node *knode)
> {
> 	return (unsigned long)knode->n_klist & KNODE_DEAD;
> }
> 
> 
> So it's meant to warn if (n_klist & KNODE_DEAD) is not equal to zero.
> 
> But in the asm:
> 
> c0000000007ff600 <.klist_add_tail>:
> ...
> c0000000007ff624:       7c 9e 23 78     mr      r30,r4		r30 = struct klist *k
> ...
> c0000000007ff638:       fb dd 00 00     std     r30,0(r29)	n->n_klist = k
> c0000000007ff63c:       0b 1e 00 00     tdnei   r30,0		trap if r30 (k) is not zero
> 
> 
> It's just warning if n_klist is not equal to zero. ie. we lost the "& KNODE_DEAD".
> 
> In the GCC output you can see it:
> 
> c0000000008c8a30 <.klist_node_init>:
> c0000000008c8a30:       39 24 00 08     addi    r9,r4,8
> c0000000008c8a34:       39 40 00 01     li      r10,1
> c0000000008c8a38:       f9 24 00 08     std     r9,8(r4)
> c0000000008c8a3c:       f9 24 00 10     std     r9,16(r4)
> c0000000008c8a40:       91 44 00 18     stw     r10,24(r4)
> c0000000008c8a44:       f8 64 00 00     std     r3,0(r4)
> c0000000008c8a48:       54 69 07 fe     clrlwi  r9,r3,31
> c0000000008c8a4c:       0b 09 00 00     tdnei   r9,0
> 
> ie. the clrlwi is "clear left (word) immediate", and zeroes everything
> except bit 0, which is equivalent to "& KNODE_DEAD".
> 
> 
> So there seems to be some misunderstanding with clang, it doesn't like
> us passing an expression to the inline asm.
> 
> AFAIK it is legal to pass expressions as inputs to inline asm, ie. it
> doesn't have to just be a variable name.
> 
> This patch seems to fix it. Not sure if that's just papering over it though.
> 
> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/bug.h b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/bug.h
> index 1ee0f22313ee..75fcb4370d96 100644
> --- a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/bug.h
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/bug.h
> @@ -119,7 +119,7 @@ __label_warn_on:						\
>  								\
>  			WARN_ENTRY(PPC_TLNEI " %4, 0",		\
>  				   BUGFLAG_WARNING | BUGFLAG_TAINT(TAINT_WARN),	\
> -				   __label_warn_on, "r" (x));	\
> +				   __label_warn_on, "r" (!!(x))); \
>  			break;					\
>  __label_warn_on:						\
>  			__ret_warn_on = true;			\
> 
> 
> Generates:
> 
> c0000000008e2ac0 <.klist_add_tail>:
> c0000000008e2ac0:       7c 08 02 a6     mflr    r0
> c0000000008e2ac4:       f8 01 00 10     std     r0,16(r1)
> c0000000008e2ac8:       f8 21 ff 71     stdu    r1,-144(r1)
> c0000000008e2acc:       fb a1 00 78     std     r29,120(r1)
> c0000000008e2ad0:       7c 7d 1b 78     mr      r29,r3
> c0000000008e2ad4:       38 60 00 01     li      r3,1
> c0000000008e2ad8:       fb c1 00 80     std     r30,128(r1)
> c0000000008e2adc:       7c 9e 23 78     mr      r30,r4
> c0000000008e2ae0:       38 9d 00 18     addi    r4,r29,24
> c0000000008e2ae4:       57 c5 07 fe     clrlwi  r5,r30,31	<-
> c0000000008e2ae8:       fb 81 00 70     std     r28,112(r1)
> c0000000008e2aec:       3b 9d 00 08     addi    r28,r29,8
> c0000000008e2af0:       fb 9d 00 08     std     r28,8(r29)
> c0000000008e2af4:       fb 9d 00 10     std     r28,16(r29)
> c0000000008e2af8:       90 64 00 00     stw     r3,0(r4)
> c0000000008e2afc:       fb dd 00 00     std     r30,0(r29)
> c0000000008e2b00:       0b 05 00 00     tdnei   r5,0		<-

Thank you for the in-depth explanation and triage! I have gone ahead and
created a standalone reproducer that shows this based on the
preprocessed file and opened https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=51634
so the LLVM developers can take a look.

Cheers,
Nathan


More information about the Linuxppc-dev mailing list