Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Mon, 19 Aug 2019 09:37:00 -0500
From:   Segher Boessenkool <segher@kernel.crashing.org>
To:     Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@c-s.fr>
Cc:     Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>,
        Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>,
        Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] powerpc: use __builtin_trap() in BUG/WARN macros.
Message-ID: <20190819143700.GK31406@gate.crashing.org>
References: <a6781075192afe0c909ce7d091de7931183a5d93.1566219503.git.christophe.leroy@c-s.fr> <20510ce03cc9463f1c9e743c1d93b939de501b53.1566219503.git.christophe.leroy@c-s.fr> <20190819132313.GH31406@gate.crashing.org> <dbafc03a-6eda-d9a3-c451-d242f03b01d9@c-s.fr>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <dbafc03a-6eda-d9a3-c451-d242f03b01d9@c-s.fr>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Aug 19, 2019 at 04:08:43PM +0200, Christophe Leroy wrote:
> Le 19/08/2019 ? 15:23, Segher Boessenkool a ?crit?:
> >On Mon, Aug 19, 2019 at 01:06:31PM +0000, Christophe Leroy wrote:
> >>Note that we keep using an assembly text using "twi 31, 0, 0" for
> >>inconditional traps because GCC drops all code after
> >>__builtin_trap() when the condition is always true at build time.
> >
> >As I said, it can also do this for conditional traps, if it can prove
> >the condition is always true.
> 
> But we have another branch for 'always true' and 'always false' using 
> __builtin_constant_p(), which don't use __builtin_trap(). Is there 
> anything wrong with that ?:

The compiler might not realise it is constant when it evaluates the
__builtin_constant_p, but only realises it later.  As the documentation
for the builtin says:
  A return of 0 does not indicate that the
  value is _not_ a constant, but merely that GCC cannot prove it is a
  constant with the specified value of the '-O' option.

(and there should be many more and more serious warnings here).

> #define BUG_ON(x) do {						\
> 	if (__builtin_constant_p(x)) {				\
> 		if (x)						\
> 			BUG();					\
> 	} else {						\
> 		if (x)						\
> 			__builtin_trap();			\
> 		BUG_ENTRY("", 0);				\
> 	}							\
> } while (0)

I think it may work if you do

#define BUG_ON(x) do {						\
	if (__builtin_constant_p(x)) {				\
		if (x)						\
			BUG();					\
	} else {						\
		BUG_ENTRY("", 0);				\
		if (x)						\
			__builtin_trap();			\
	}							\
} while (0)

or even just

#define BUG_ON(x) do {						\
	BUG_ENTRY("", 0);					\
	if (x)							\
		__builtin_trap();				\
	}							\
} while (0)

if BUG_ENTRY can work for the trap insn *after* it.

> >Can you put the bug table asm *before* the __builtin_trap maybe?  That
> >should make it all work fine...  If you somehow can tell what machine
> >instruction is that trap, anyway.
> 
> And how can I tell that ?

I don't know how BUG_ENTRY works exactly.


Segher