lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Aug]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH v4 3/5] Cleanup ISA string setting
From
On Mon, 20 Aug 2018 19:47:28 PDT (-0700), alankao@andestech.com wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 20, 2018 at 03:22:55PM -0700, Palmer Dabbelt wrote:
>> On Tue, 07 Aug 2018 20:24:43 PDT (-0700), alankao@andestech.com wrote:
>> >Just a side note: (Assume that atomic and compressed is on)
>> >
>> >Before this patch, assembler was always given the riscv64imafdc
>> >MARCH string because there are fld/fsd's in entry.S; compiler was
>> >always given riscv64imac because kernel doesn't need floating point
>> >code generation. After this, the MARCH string in AFLAGS and CFLAGS
>> >become the same.
>> >
>> >Signed-off-by: Alan Kao <alankao@andestech.com>
>> >Cc: Greentime Hu <greentime@andestech.com>
>> >Cc: Vincent Chen <vincentc@andestech.com>
>> >Cc: Zong Li <zong@andestech.com>
>> >Cc: Nick Hu <nickhu@andestech.com>
>> >Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
>> >---
>> > arch/riscv/Makefile | 19 ++++++++-----------
>> > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
>> >
>> >diff --git a/arch/riscv/Makefile b/arch/riscv/Makefile
>> >index 6d4a5f6c3f4f..e0fe6790624f 100644
>> >--- a/arch/riscv/Makefile
>> >+++ b/arch/riscv/Makefile
>> >@@ -26,7 +26,6 @@ ifeq ($(CONFIG_ARCH_RV64I),y)
>> >
>> > KBUILD_CFLAGS += -mabi=lp64
>> > KBUILD_AFLAGS += -mabi=lp64
>> >- KBUILD_MARCH = rv64im
>> > LDFLAGS += -melf64lriscv
>> > else
>> > BITS := 32
>> >@@ -34,22 +33,20 @@ else
>> >
>> > KBUILD_CFLAGS += -mabi=ilp32
>> > KBUILD_AFLAGS += -mabi=ilp32
>> >- KBUILD_MARCH = rv32im
>> > LDFLAGS += -melf32lriscv
>> > endif
>> >
>> > KBUILD_CFLAGS += -Wall
>> >
>> >-ifeq ($(CONFIG_RISCV_ISA_A),y)
>> >- KBUILD_ARCH_A = a
>> >-endif
>> >-ifeq ($(CONFIG_RISCV_ISA_C),y)
>> >- KBUILD_ARCH_C = c
>> >-endif
>> >-
>> >-KBUILD_AFLAGS += -march=$(KBUILD_MARCH)$(KBUILD_ARCH_A)fd$(KBUILD_ARCH_C)
>> >+# ISA string setting
>> >+riscv-march-$(CONFIG_ARCH_RV32I) := rv32im
>> >+riscv-march-$(CONFIG_ARCH_RV64I) := rv64im
>> >+riscv-march-$(CONFIG_RISCV_ISA_A) := $(riscv-march-y)a
>> >+riscv-march-y := $(riscv-march-y)fd
>> >+riscv-march-$(CONFIG_RISCV_ISA_C) := $(riscv-march-y)c
>> >+KBUILD_CFLAGS += -march=$(riscv-march-y)
>> >+KBUILD_AFLAGS += -march=$(riscv-march-y)
>> >
>> >-KBUILD_CFLAGS += -march=$(KBUILD_MARCH)$(KBUILD_ARCH_A)$(KBUILD_ARCH_C)
>>
>> We used to have "fd" disabled in KBUILD_CFLAGS because we wanted to ensure
>> that any use of floating-point types within the kernel would trigger the
>> inclusion of soft-float libraries rather than emitting hardware
>> floating-point instructions. The worry here is that we'd end up corrupting
>> the user's floating-point state with the kernel accesses because of the lazy
>> save/restore stuff going on.
>
> Thanks for pointing that out.
>
> Just as you said, the use of KBUILD_CFLAGS=*fd* is based on the assumption that
> not a single floating-point instruction involves in the kernel, and that might
> be wrong.
>
>> I remember at some point it was illegal to use floating-point within the
>> kernel, but for some reason I thought that had changed. I do see a handful
>> of references to "float" and "double" in the kernel source, and most of
>> references to kernel_fpu_begin() appear to be in SSE-specific stuff. My one
>> worry are the usages in drivers/gpu/drm/amd/display/dc/calcs/dcn_calcs.c, as
>> I can't quickly demonstrate they won't happen.
>
> Empirically, this CFLAGS with *fd* did not cause any trouble to me, but of
> course this is not a good statement to support this patch.
>
> Meanwhile, I find a flaw in "[PATCH 4/5] Allow to Disable FPU Support."
> The purpose of this "[PATCH 3/5] Cleanup ISA String" was to make CONFIG_FPU
> a switch for the appearance of "fd" in both KBUILD_CFLAGS and KBUILD_ASFLAGS,
> but somehow the modification was forgotten.
>
>>
>> If we do this I think we should at least ensure kernel_fpu_{begin,end}() do
>> the right thing for RISC-V. I'd still feel safer telling the C compiler to
>> disallow floating-point, though, as I'm a bit paranoid that GCC might go and
>> emit a floating-point instruction even when it's not explicitly asked for.
>> I just asked Jim, who actually understands GCC, and he said that it'll spill
>> to floating-point registers if the cost function determines it's cheaper
>> than the stack. While he thinks that's unlikely, I don't really want to
>> rely a GCC cost function for the correctness of our kernel port.
>
> The purpose of this whole patchset was to remove all floating-point-related
> logic in kernel space (while remainging FPU systems work as usual), so
> implementing the two APIs would be out of scope here.
>
> I suggest that, some people have to provide these APIs if they do need hardware
> floating-point calculation in kernel space (kernel or module) in the future.
> It seems that we don't need those for the kernel and any already supported
> hardware drivers at least for now. Please correct me if my understanding is
> out-of-date.
>
>>
>> I'd like to avoid having "-march=*fd*" in CFLAGS, unless someone can
>> convince me it's safe and that I'm just being too paranoid :).
>
> I will send a new version of the patchset, which will make sure that CFLAGS has
> no *fd* (3/5) and the CONFIG_FPU did remove *fd* from ASFLAGS (4/5).

Thanks!

>
>>
>> > KBUILD_CFLAGS += -mno-save-restore
>> > KBUILD_CFLAGS += -DCONFIG_PAGE_OFFSET=$(CONFIG_PAGE_OFFSET)
>
> Thanks!
>
> Alan

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-08-21 21:37    [W:0.047 / U:13.780 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site