Re: [clang] stack protector and f1f029c7bf

[hpa]

On May 24, 2018 3:31:05 PM PDT, Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>On Thu, May 24, 2018 at 3:05 PM H. Peter Anvin <hpa@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> COMPILER AR: "=rm" should NEVER generate worse code than "=r". That
>is
>> unequivocally a compiler bug.
>
>Filed: https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=37583
>
>> >> You are claiming it doesn't buy us anything, but you are only
>looking
>at
>> > the paravirt case which is kind of "special" (in the short bus kind
>of
>way),
>> >
>> > That's fair.  Is another possible solution to have paravirt maybe
>not
>use
>> > native_save_fl() then, but its own
>non-static-inline-without-m-constraint
>> > implementation?
>
>> KERNEL AR: change native_save_fl() to an extern inline with an
>assembly
>> out-of-line implementation, to satisfy the paravirt requirement that
>no
>> GPRs other than %rax are clobbered.
>
>i'm happy to add that, do you have a recommendation if it should go in
>an
>existing .S file or a new one (and if so where/what shall I call it?).

How about irqflags.c since that is what the .h file is called.

It should simply be:

push %rdi
popf
ret

pushf
pop %rax
ret

... but with all the regular assembly decorations, of course.
-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.