[lkml]   [2017]   [Sep]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH 2/2] x86/asm: Fix inline asm call constraints for clang
On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 1:52 PM, Brian Gerst <> wrote:
>>>>>>> I think we need just the frame itself and RSP pointing below this
>>>>>>> frame. If we don't have a frame, CALL instruction will smash whatever
>>>>>>> RSP happens to point to. Compiler doesn't have to setup RSP to point
>>>>>>> below used part of stack in leaf functions.
>>>>>> In the kernel it does. Redzoning is not allowed in the kernel, because
>>>>>> interrupts or exceptions would also smash the redzone.
>>>>> I see... But it's the same for user-space signals, the first thing a
>>>>> signal should do is to skip the redzone. I guess interrupt handlers
>>>>> should switch to interrupt stack which avoids smashing redzone
>>>>> altogether. Do you mean nested interrupts/exceptions in interrupts?
>>>>> In my experience frames in leaf functions can have pretty large
>>>>> performance penalty. Wonder if we have we considered changing
>>>>> interrupt/exception handlers to avoid smashing redzones and disable
>>>>> leaf frames?
>>>> Currently, on x86-64, I believe all exceptions have their own dedicated
>>>> stacks in the kernel, but IRQs still come in on the task's kernel stack.
>>>> Andy, do you know if there's a reason why IRQs don't use a dedicated IST
>>>> stack?
>>> Because IST is awful due to recursion issues. We immediately switch to an IRQ stack, though.
>>> If the kernel wanted a redzone, it would have to use IST for everything, which would entail a bunch of unpleasant hackery.
>> Thanks.
>> I guess it must be finite recursion, because we could not handle
>> infinite with finite stack. I thing that solves it is simply:
>> sub $256, %rsp
>> ... do stuff ...
>> add $256, %rsp
>> Don't know if it's applicable to interrupts or not.
> No, it is not. The processor pushes 5 or 6 words of data on the stack
> (the IRET frame plus an error code for certain exceptions) before the
> interrupt handler gets control. So without using the IST for stack
> switching on every interrupt, the redzone cannot be used in the kernel
> as it will get smashed by the IRET frame. In addition, since the
> kernel's stack is limited in size, skipping 128 bytes on every
> interrupt would overrun the stack faster. The small gain from using
> the redzone in the kernel is outweighed by these limitations.

I see, thanks for educating.

 \ /
  Last update: 2017-09-21 19:32    [W:0.067 / U:3.764 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site