Re: [PATCH] arm64: Add ASM modifier for xN register operands

[Ard Biesheuvel]

On 24 April 2017 at 18:00, Will Deacon <will.deacon@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi Matthias,
>
> On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 11:30:53AM -0700, Matthias Kaehlcke wrote:
>> Many inline assembly statements don't include the 'x' modifier when
>> using xN registers as operands. This is perfectly valid, however it
>> causes clang to raise warnings like this:
>>
>> warning: value size does not match register size specified by the
>>   constraint and modifier [-Wasm-operand-widths]
>> ...
>> arch/arm64/include/asm/barrier.h:62:23: note: expanded from macro
>>   '__smp_store_release'
>>     asm volatile ("stlr %1, %0"
>
> If I understand this correctly, then the warning is emitted when we pass
> in a value smaller than 64-bit, but refer to %<n> without a modifier
> in the inline asm.
>
> However, if that's the case then I don't understand why:
>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/io.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/io.h
>> index 0c00c87bb9dd..021e1733da0c 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/io.h
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/io.h
>> @@ -39,33 +39,33 @@
>>  #define __raw_writeb __raw_writeb
>>  static inline void __raw_writeb(u8 val, volatile void __iomem *addr)
>>  {
>> -     asm volatile("strb %w0, [%1]" : : "rZ" (val), "r" (addr));
>> +     asm volatile("strb %w0, [%x1]" : : "rZ" (val), "r" (addr));
>
> is necessary. addr is a pointer type, so is 64-bit.
>
> Given that the scattergun nature of this patch implies that you've been
> fixing the places where warnings are reported, then I'm confused as to
> why a warning is generated for the case above.
>
> What am I missing?
>

AIUI, Clang now always complains for missing register width modifiers,
not just for placeholders that resolve to a 32-bit (or smaller)
quantity.