On Tue, Feb 06, 2018 at 12:52:34PM +0000, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote: > ----- On Feb 5, 2018, at 7:40 PM, Stephen Rothwell s...@canb.auug.org.au > wrote: > > > Hi all, > > > > Today's linux-next merge of the tip tree got a conflict in: > > > > arch/arm64/kernel/entry.S > > > > between commit: > > > > 4bf3286d29f3 ("arm64: entry: Hook up entry trampoline to exception > > vectors") > > > > from Linus' tree and commit: > > > > f1e3a12b6543 ("membarrier/arm64: Provide core serializing command") > > > > from the tip tree. > > > > I fixed it up (probably not completely - see below) and can carry the > > fix as necessary. This is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, > > but any non trivial conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream > > maintainer when your tree is submitted for merging. You may also want > > to consider cooperating with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to > > minimise any particularly complex conflicts. > > The change introduced by 4bf3286d29 "arm64: entry: Hook up entry trampoline > to exception vectors" adds a trampoline as mechanism for return: > > - eret // return to kernel > + > +#ifndef CONFIG_UNMAP_KERNEL_AT_EL0 > + eret > +#else > + .if \el == 0 > + bne 4f > + msr far_el1, x30 > + tramp_alias x30, tramp_exit_native > + br x30 > +4: > + tramp_alias x30, tramp_exit_compat > + br x30 > + .else > + eret > + .endif > +#endif > > Which means that with CONFIG_UNMAP_KERNEL_AT_EL0, for return to EL0, > the eret is in the trampoline: > > .macro tramp_exit, regsize = 64 > adr x30, tramp_vectors > msr vbar_el1, x30 > tramp_unmap_kernel x30 > .if \regsize == 64 > mrs x30, far_el1 > .endif > eret > .endm > > ENTRY(tramp_exit_native) > tramp_exit > END(tramp_exit_native) > > ENTRY(tramp_exit_compat) > tramp_exit 32 > END(tramp_exit_compat) > > > One approach I would consider for this is to duplicate this > comment and add it just above the "eret" instruction within the > macro: > > /* > * ARCH_HAS_MEMBARRIER_SYNC_CORE rely on eret context synchronization > * when returning from IPI handler, and when returning to user-space. > */ > > Or perhaps Will has something else in mind ?
To be honest with you, I'd just drop the comment entirely. entry.S is terrifying these days and nobody should have to go in there to understand why we select ARCH_HAS_MEMBARRIER_SYNC_CORE. If you really feel a justification is needed, I'd be happy with a line in the Kconfig file. Will