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:   Tue, 29 Oct 2019 21:12:18 -0700
From:   Nathan Chancellor <natechancellor@gmail.com>
To:     Segher Boessenkool <segher@kernel.crashing.org>
Cc:     Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>,
        Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>,
        Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>,
        Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>,
        clang-built-linux <clang-built-linux@googlegroups.com>,
        linuxppc-dev <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 3/3] powerpc/prom_init: Use -ffreestanding to avoid a
 reference to bcmp
Message-ID: <20191030041218.GB14630@ubuntu-m2-xlarge-x86>
References: <20190911182049.77853-1-natechancellor@gmail.com>
 <20191014025101.18567-1-natechancellor@gmail.com>
 <20191014025101.18567-4-natechancellor@gmail.com>
 <20191014093501.GE28442@gate.crashing.org>
 <CAKwvOdmcUT2A9FG0JD9jd0s=gAavRc_h+RLG6O3mBz4P1FfF8w@mail.gmail.com>
 <20191014191141.GK28442@gate.crashing.org>
 <20191018190022.GA1292@ubuntu-m2-xlarge-x86>
 <20191018200210.GR28442@gate.crashing.org>
 <20191022051529.GA44041@ubuntu-m2-xlarge-x86>
 <20191022085709.GI28442@gate.crashing.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20191022085709.GI28442@gate.crashing.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Oct 22, 2019 at 03:57:09AM -0500, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 21, 2019 at 10:15:29PM -0700, Nathan Chancellor wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 18, 2019 at 03:02:10PM -0500, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> > > I think the proper solution is for the kernel to *do* use -ffreestanding,
> > > and then somehow tell the kernel that memcpy etc. are the standard
> > > functions.  A freestanding GCC already requires memcpy, memmove, memset,
> > > memcmp, and sometimes abort to exist and do the standard thing; why cannot
> > > programs then also rely on it to be the standard functions.
> > > 
> > > What exact functions are the reason the kernel does not use -ffreestanding?
> > > Is it just memcpy?  Is more wanted?
> > 
> > I think Linus summarized it pretty well here:
> > 
> > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/CAHk-=wi-epJZfBHDbKKDZ64us7WkF=LpUfhvYBmZSteO8Q0RAg@mail.gmail.com/
> 
> GCC recognises __builtin_memcpy (or any other __builtin) just fine even
> with -ffreestanding.
> 
> So the kernel wants a warning (or error) whenever a call to one of these
> library functions is generated by the compiler without the user asking
> for it directly (via a __builtin)?  And that is all that is needed for
> the kernel to use -ffreestanding?
> 
> That shouldn't be hard.  Anything missing here?
> 
> 
> Segher

Yes, I suppose that would be good enough.

I don't know if there are any other optimizations that are missed out on
by using -ffreestanding. It would probably be worth asking other kernel
developers on a separate thread (or the one I linked above).

Would be nice to get this shored up soon since our PowerPC builds have
been broken since the beginning of August :/

Cheers,
Nathan