Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-110210-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:4601:e00::3 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:4601:e00::3;
From: David Laight <David.Laight@ACULAB.COM>
To: 'Russell King' <linux@armlinux.org.uk>
CC: Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>, 'Jiangfeng Xiao'
	<xiaojiangfeng@huawei.com>, "arnd@arndb.de" <arnd@arndb.de>,
	"keescook@chromium.org" <keescook@chromium.org>, "haibo.li@mediatek.com"
	<haibo.li@mediatek.com>, "angelogioacchino.delregno@collabora.com"
	<angelogioacchino.delregno@collabora.com>, "amergnat@baylibre.com"
	<amergnat@baylibre.com>, "akpm@linux-foundation.org"
	<akpm@linux-foundation.org>, "dave.hansen@linux.intel.com"
	<dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>, "douzhaolei@huawei.com"
	<douzhaolei@huawei.com>, "gustavoars@kernel.org" <gustavoars@kernel.org>,
	"jpoimboe@kernel.org" <jpoimboe@kernel.org>, "kepler.chenxin@huawei.com"
	<kepler.chenxin@huawei.com>, "kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com"
	<kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>, "linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org"
	<linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org>, "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org"
	<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, "linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>, "nixiaoming@huawei.com"
	<nixiaoming@huawei.com>, "peterz@infradead.org" <peterz@infradead.org>,
	"wangbing6@huawei.com" <wangbing6@huawei.com>, "wangfangpeng1@huawei.com"
	<wangfangpeng1@huawei.com>, "jannh@google.com" <jannh@google.com>,
	"willy@infradead.org" <willy@infradead.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v2] ARM: unwind: improve unwinders for noreturn case
Thread-Topic: [PATCH v2] ARM: unwind: improve unwinders for noreturn case
Thread-Index: AQHae3ROEuI+AaCprEesIWGaAOB7ebFB9uHAgAAWtoCAAAVW8IAACy4AgAADrmCAAAjqAIAAC+nggAASTICAAASwMA==
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2024 15:20:57 +0000
Message-ID: <401453a216644af98d577f51c12d292b@AcuMS.aculab.com>
References: <84a57ca8-8963-ca24-8bd1-ddc5c33bf4da@huawei.com>
 <Zfs7sT6Pxy5yjnPC@shell.armlinux.org.uk>
 <bad25937-fc98-8e11-4279-ab6b3a727c1f@huawei.com>
 <bbcca1e205384cf0b42236e17f3969f7@AcuMS.aculab.com>
 <ZfwYx/8k8FVONg6+@shell.armlinux.org.uk>
 <db930076c837456f999daee5cb76735f@AcuMS.aculab.com>
 <ZfwmomjUwQdCefzh@shell.armlinux.org.uk>
 <0fd55e156195440bb1d815dd8300894b@AcuMS.aculab.com>
 <ZfwxMuPflqlVyCDd@shell.armlinux.org.uk>
 <9d6057b110034c04b6b590522c8c69cc@AcuMS.aculab.com>
 <ZfxKiQuNM/zruxSd@shell.armlinux.org.uk>
In-Reply-To: <ZfxKiQuNM/zruxSd@shell.armlinux.org.uk>
Accept-Language: en-GB, en-US
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

From: Russell King
> Sent: 21 March 2024 14:56
>=20
> On Thu, Mar 21, 2024 at 02:37:28PM +0000, David Laight wrote:
> > From: Russell King
> > > Sent: 21 March 2024 13:08
> > >
> > > On Thu, Mar 21, 2024 at 12:57:07PM +0000, David Laight wrote:
> > > > From: Russell King
> > > > > Sent: 21 March 2024 12:23
> > > > ...
> > > > > > That might mean you can get the BL in the middle of a function
> > > > > > but where the following instruction is for the 'no stack frame'
> > > > > > side of the branch.
> > > > > > That is very likely to break any stack offset calculations.
> > > > >
> > > > > No it can't. At any one point in the function, the stack has to b=
e in
> > > > > a well defined state, so that access to local variables can work,=
 and
> > > > > also the stack can be correctly unwound. If there exists a point =
in
> > > > > the function body which can be reached where the stack could be i=
n two
> > > > > different states, then the stack can't be restored to the parent
> > > > > context.
> > > >
> > > > Actually you can get there with a function that has a lot of args.
> > > > So you can have:
> > > > =09if (...) {
> > > > =09=09push x
> > > > =09=09bl func
> > > > =09=09add %sp, #8
> > > > =09}
> > > > =09code;
> > > > which is fine.
> > >
> > > No you can't.... and that isn't even Arm code. Arm doesn't use %sp.
> > > Moreover, that "bl" will stomp over the link register, meaning this
> > > function can not return.
> >
..
>=20
> Don't show me Arm64 assembly when we're discussing Arm32.

Oops - I'd assumed no one did 32bit :-)
In any case it is much the same, see https://godbolt.org/z/7dcbKrs76

f4:
        push    {r3, lr}
        subs    r3, r0, #0
        ble     .L2
        mov     r2, r3
        mov     r1, r3
        bl      f
L2:
        pop     {r3, pc}

f5:
        subs    r3, r0, #0
        ble     .L6
        push    {lr}
        sub     sp, sp, #12
        mov     r2, r3
        mov     r1, r3
        str     r3, [sp]
        bl      f
L6:
        bx      lr

That is with -mno-sched-prolog but with 5+ args they spill to stack
and the %sp change is pulled into the conditional.

It does look like %lr is being saved (and for arm64 I think).

=09David

-
Registered Address Lakeside, Bramley Road, Mount Farm, Milton Keynes, MK1 1=
PT, UK
Registration No: 1397386 (Wales)