[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 09:55:24 AEST 2021


On Thu, Aug 26, 2021 at 11:54:17AM -0700, Nathan Chancellor wrote:
> 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.

Based on Eli Friedman's comment in the bug, would something like this
work and not regress GCC? I noticed that the BUG_ON macro does a cast as
well. Nick pointed out to me privately that we have run into what seems
like a similar issue before in commit 6c58f25e6938 ("riscv/atomic: Fix
sign extension for RV64I").

Cheers,
Nathan

diff --git a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/bug.h b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/bug.h
index 1ee0f22313ee..35022667f57d 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" ((__force long)(x)));   \
                        break;                                  \
 __label_warn_on:                                               \
                        __ret_warn_on = true;                   \


More information about the Linuxppc-dev mailing list