Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Thu, 24 Nov 2022 00:26:12 -0800
From:   Deepak Gupta <debug@rivosinc.com>
To:     Guo Ren <guoren@kernel.org>
Cc:     palmer@dabbelt.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, paul.walmsley@sifive.com,
        Jisheng Zhang <jszhang@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] riscv: VMAP_STACK overflow detection thread-safe
Message-ID: <20221124082612.GC1149630@debug.ba.rivosinc.com>
References: <20221124005006.1788315-1-debug@rivosinc.com>
 <CAJF2gTSwMZQvSNxb2_5GNrVG0pwfXWsHmp8zZG=gFHnhc95bjQ@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAJF2gTSwMZQvSNxb2_5GNrVG0pwfXWsHmp8zZG=gFHnhc95bjQ@mail.gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Nov 24, 2022 at 09:32:19AM +0800, Guo Ren wrote:
>> +.macro asm_per_cpu dst sym tmp
>> +       REG_L \tmp, TASK_TI_CPU_NUM(tp)
>> +       slli \tmp, \tmp, 0x3
>> +       la \dst, __per_cpu_offset
>> +       add \dst, \dst, \tmp
>> +       REG_L \tmp, 0(\dst)
>> +       la \dst, \sym
>> +       add \dst, \dst, \tmp
>Another tricky asm code of using percpu, I don't know how the percpu
>maintenance guy thinks.

On this, if you can point me to someone, I would like to get their feedback.
While discussing this, one issue that comes in my mind is if the shift of 0x3 
is correct or not on 32bit systems. I don't know what's the size of each entry
in `__per_cpu_offset`. On 64bit it's 8 bytes and thus 3 bit shift.