From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on inbox.vuxu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.9 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL,SUSPICIOUS_RECIPS autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: (qmail 4560 invoked from network); 25 Apr 2020 03:43:56 -0000 Received: from mother.openwall.net (195.42.179.200) by inbox.vuxu.org with UTF8ESMTPZ; 25 Apr 2020 03:43:56 -0000 Received: (qmail 16227 invoked by uid 550); 25 Apr 2020 03:43:55 -0000 Mailing-List: contact musl-help@lists.openwall.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-ID: Reply-To: musl@lists.openwall.com Received: (qmail 16200 invoked from network); 25 Apr 2020 03:43:54 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=date:from:subject:to:cc:references:in-reply-to:mime-version :message-id:content-transfer-encoding; bh=Y5+ZFuatWnUBxjoD3Ef2zxIbe+EfnqCDBpvAS6lmVxU=; b=qn+lbAnyUn5UYuI5D2rGvG7x0G2FdGcsKmFk7vTFpw9F5tZ6BFzOO+2Fvu7VwSn0bP bH+Eh80B60KXtgsHH5v3FyqWR4hzEqs7tI606R5xrMRnbrBNydH+iXluWXkDE5xTBoNG BhQx1IrI5T9C4eN4Ag0G77ZqnlRxtsB43zq/whx2cAGPOXMM7IaczjoR6fwqYAdn7u5j RykgcYctY+frRbSo1h55axSmzlkGKSeqje37YhAXAN0YZTKk9/Orb2GkeRF6B5je+OGt J78fvR9Cp9TSYgi4ZYLEn4ycv2Xgk2utbsJEQFUTUCJmacIAxdR6tDN732cTScedYg+F 8CMQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:subject:to:cc:references:in-reply-to :mime-version:message-id:content-transfer-encoding; bh=Y5+ZFuatWnUBxjoD3Ef2zxIbe+EfnqCDBpvAS6lmVxU=; b=ZertpIGvj5xOSFyDXX+fbvTHLeqnjco6hEDbresO0Jw0+ZiaTUqCgwDuwfbt8gclC9 A1qlDxBLuE9MkFOTKf1+Q3a6elIaX+dHotjqeQLj7Cmei+WL4S/NDOHA7Je6GWTpAowF 0aEuiz4Y844YeEdKqLFCVlLU5Az3FhvV8mUfoIVzgUariyina1i6pw2cW6Mgk1UCFV7u oWHvXui60mTS+v/4bSV4Nooyn7hpz8AtZsxsiqUmzSuywRs2ieZkpThOfOPxCYalmh/H EfuZJ4hRGZ7HpGBMv+ywPl1/Ff6skl0QPkC1Q/DkwkeszAaF3OcFmTarwwJdlSpD6jP7 PkLQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AGi0PubN4G4CHN+CEXen5MElm2L11fa6geOkBv1CCIL79TXDGOY6SSTd DlZorbjDyedvO0PbLXOKakw= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APiQypIVGDqm9KyJOiGoo/Cr+RASJ1m+7LIYHb3HVmsOJBhMd/+jZmS7/QFIhpBVt/X7IaEmj1nZ8A== X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:a50a:: with SMTP id s10mr11854311plq.164.1587786222139; Fri, 24 Apr 2020 20:43:42 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 25 Apr 2020 13:40:24 +1000 From: Nicholas Piggin To: Adhemerval Zanella , Rich Felker Cc: libc-alpha@sourceware.org, libc-dev@lists.llvm.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, musl@lists.openwall.com References: <20200420040926.GA11469@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <1587356128.aslvdnmtbw.astroid@bobo.none> <20200420172715.GC11469@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <1587531042.1qvc287tsc.astroid@bobo.none> <20200423023642.GP11469@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <20200423161841.GU11469@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <3fe73604-7c92-e073-cbe7-abb4a8ae7c1a@linaro.org> <20200423164314.GX11469@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <64d82a23-1f6e-2e6a-b7a9-0eeab8a53435@linaro.org> <20200423174214.GZ11469@brightrain.aerifal.cx> In-Reply-To: <20200423174214.GZ11469@brightrain.aerifal.cx> MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <1587785455.59207xhucl.astroid@bobo.none> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [musl] Powerpc Linux 'scv' system call ABI proposal take 2 Excerpts from Rich Felker's message of April 24, 2020 3:42 am: > On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 02:15:58PM -0300, Adhemerval Zanella wrote: >>=20 >>=20 >> On 23/04/2020 13:43, Rich Felker wrote: >> > On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 01:35:01PM -0300, Adhemerval Zanella wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> On 23/04/2020 13:18, Rich Felker wrote: >> >>> On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 09:13:57AM -0300, Adhemerval Zanella wrote: >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> On 22/04/2020 23:36, Rich Felker wrote: >> >>>>> On Wed, Apr 22, 2020 at 04:18:36PM +1000, Nicholas Piggin wrote: >> >>>>>> Yeah I had a bit of a play around with musl (which is very nice c= ode I >> >>>>>> must say). The powerpc64 syscall asm is missing ctr clobber by th= e way. =20 >> >>>>>> Fortunately adding it doesn't change code generation for me, but = it=20 >> >>>>>> should be fixed. glibc had the same bug at one point I think (pro= bably=20 >> >>>>>> due to syscall ABI documentation not existing -- something now li= ves in=20 >> >>>>>> linux/Documentation/powerpc/syscall64-abi.rst). >> >>>>> >> >>>>> Do you know anywhere I can read about the ctr issue, possibly the >> >>>>> relevant glibc bug report? I'm not particularly familiar with ppc >> >>>>> register file (at least I have to refamiliarize myself every time = I >> >>>>> work on this stuff) so it'd be nice to understand what's >> >>>>> potentially-wrong now. >> >>>> >> >>>> My understanding is the ctr issue only happens for vDSO calls where= it >> >>>> fallback to a syscall in case an error (invalid argument, etc. and >> >>>> assuming if vDSO does not fallback to a syscall it always succeed). >> >>>> This makes the vDSO call on powerpc to have same same ABI constrain= t >> >>>> as a syscall, where it clobbers CR0. >> >>> >> >>> I think you mean "vsyscall", the old thing glibc used where there ar= e >> >>> in-userspace implementations of some syscalls with call interfaces >> >>> roughly equivalent to a syscall. musl has never used this. It only >> >>> uses the actual exported functions from the vdso which have normal >> >>> external function call ABI. >> >> >> >> I wasn't thinking in vsyscall in fact, which afaik it is a x86 thing. >> >> The issue is indeed when calling the powerpc provided functions in=20 >> >> vDSO, which musl might want to do eventually. >> >=20 >> > AIUI (at least this is true for all other archs) the functions have >> > normal external function call ABI and calling them has nothing to do >> > with syscall mechanisms. >>=20 >> My point is powerpc specifically does not follow it, since it issues a >> syscall in fallback and its semantic follow kernel syscalls (error >> signalled in cr0, r3 being always a positive value): >=20 > Oh, then I think we'll just ignore these unless the kernel can make > ones with a reasonable ABI. It's not worth having ppc-specific code > for this... It would be really nice if ones that actually behave like > functions could be added though. Yeah this is an annoyance for me after making the scv ABI return -ve in=20 r3 for error and other things that more closely follow function calls,=20 we still have the vdso functions using the old style. Maybe we should add function call style vdso too. Thanks, Nick