On Tuesday 18 September 2007 21:47, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> * Denys Vlasenko ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > On Tuesday 18 September 2007 18:59, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> > > * Denys Vlasenko ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > > > On Monday 17 September 2007 19:42, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> > > > > Index: linux-2.6-lttng/include/asm-generic/vmlinux.lds.h
> > > > > ===================================================================
> > > > > --- linux-2.6-lttng.orig/include/asm-generic/vmlinux.lds.h
> > > > > 2007-09-17 13:25:06.000000000 -0400
> > > > > +++ linux-2.6-lttng/include/asm-generic/vmlinux.lds.h 2007-09-17
> > > > > 13:35:50.000000000 -0400
> > > > > @@ -122,6 +122,13 @@
> > > > > VMLINUX_SYMBOL(__stop___kcrctab_gpl_future) = .;
> > > > > \
> > > > > }
> > > > > \
> > > > >
> > > > > \
> > > > > + /* Immediate values: pointers */
> > > > > \
> > > > > + __immediate : AT(ADDR(__immediate) - LOAD_OFFSET) {
> > > > > \
> > > > > + VMLINUX_SYMBOL(__start___immediate) = .;
> > > > > \
> > > > > + *(__immediate)
> > > > > \
> > > > > + VMLINUX_SYMBOL(__stop___immediate) = .;
> > > > > \
> > > > > + }
> > > > > \
> > > > > +
> > > > > \
> > > >
> > > > Why do you need an output section for that? IOW: will this work too?
> > > >
> > > > .data : ... {
> > > > ...
> > > >
> > > > VMLINUX_SYMBOL(__start___immediate) = .;
> > > > \
> > > > *(__immediate)
> > > > \
> > > > VMLINUX_SYMBOL(__stop___immediate) = .;
> > > > \
> > > > ...
> > > > }
> > > >
> > >
> > > This last one could cause alignment problems. We either have to use the
> > > proper ALIGN() before the section, or let AT(ADDR(__immediate) -
> > > LOAD_OFFSET) take care of it. I prefer the latter.
> >
> > This adds yet another output section in vmlinux, and there is
> > no tools which need that. We already have 30+ sections there while we need
> > ~20.
> >
> > I am trying to fix the mess. Please don't add to it.
> >
> > Re alignment: (1) do you really realy REALLY need it? Last I checked,
> > i386 was handling unaligned accesses just fine; and
> > (2) this works:
> >
> > . = ALIGN(4)
> > VMLINUX_SYMBOL(__start___immediate) = .; \
> > *(__immediate) \
> > VMLINUX_SYMBOL(__stop___immediate) = .; \
> >
> >
>
> Alignment: I need the __start___immediate and __stop___immediate values
> to be at the same alignment as the *(__immediate) content, or else we
> end up thinking that padding is data.
>
> . = ALIGN(4) works fine as long as the structure within the section is
> not bigger or equal to 32 bytes: gcc has the habit to align 32 bytes
> structure on 32 bytes multiples. The safest way I found to do it is to
> declare the section as I do: it will cause no breakage if anybody append
> data to the structure.
If your structure will be padded by gcc, then this:
+#define immediate_read(name) \
+ ({ \
+ __typeof__(name##__immediate) value; \
+ switch (sizeof(value)) { \
+ case 1: \
+ asm ( ".section __immediate, \"a\", @progbits;\n\t" \
+ ".long %1, (0f)+1, 1;\n\t" \
+ ".previous;\n\t" \
+ "0:\n\t" \
+ "mov %2,%0;\n\t" \
+ : "=r" (value) \
+ : "m" (name##__immediate), \
+ "i" (0)); \
+ break; \
will produce wrongly-sized "struct __immediate" (truncated one),
since gcc has no idea that you are building struct __immediate there,
and here:
+void immediate_update_range(const struct __immediate *begin,
+ const struct __immediate *end)
+{
+ const struct __immediate *iter;
+ int ret;
+
+ for (iter = begin; iter < end; iter++) {
+ mutex_lock(&immediate_mutex);
+ kernel_text_lock();
+ ret = arch_immediate_update(iter);
+ kernel_text_unlock();
+ if (ret)
+ printk(KERN_WARNING "Invalid immediate value. "
+ "Variable at %p, "
+ "instruction at %p, size %lu\n",
+ (void*)iter->immediate,
+ (void*)iter->var, iter->size);
+ mutex_unlock(&immediate_mutex);
+ }
+}
iter++ will go off rails.
--
vda
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
