* Miguel Bernal Marin <miguel.bernal.ma...@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> kernel/locking/rwsem.o: warning: objtool: up_read()+0x11: call without frame
> pointer save/setup
>
> The warning means gcc 7.2.0 placed the __up_read() inline asm (and its
> call instruction) before the frame pointer setup in up_read(),
> which breaks frame pointer convention and can result in incorrect
> stack traces.
>
> Force a stack frame to be created before the call instruction by listing
> the stack pointer as an output operand in the inline asm statement.
>
> Signed-off-by: Miguel Bernal Marin <miguel.bernal.ma...@linux.intel.com>
> ---
> arch/x86/include/asm/rwsem.h | 6 ++++--
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/rwsem.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/rwsem.h
> index a34e0d4b957d..762167afaec0 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/rwsem.h
> +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/rwsem.h
> @@ -166,14 +166,16 @@ static inline bool __down_write_trylock(struct
> rw_semaphore *sem)
> static inline void __up_read(struct rw_semaphore *sem)
> {
> long tmp;
> + register void *__sp asm(_ASM_SP);
> +
> asm volatile("# beginning __up_read\n\t"
> - LOCK_PREFIX " xadd %1,(%2)\n\t"
> + LOCK_PREFIX " xadd %1,(%3)\n\t"
> /* subtracts 1, returns the old value */
> " jns 1f\n\t"
> " call call_rwsem_wake\n" /* expects old value in %edx */
> "1:\n"
> "# ending __up_read\n"
> - : "+m" (sem->count), "=d" (tmp)
> + : "+m" (sem->count), "=d" (tmp), "+r" (__sp)
> : "a" (sem), "1" (-RWSEM_ACTIVE_READ_BIAS)
> : "memory", "cc");
Please also convert it to named operands (in separate patches!) - this
apparently
BASIC inspired labeling syntax of GCC is utterly confusing, counterproductive
and
somewhat embarrasing as well, considering that we write 2017.
Thanks,
Ingo
