From: Thomas Preudhomme <thomas.preudhomme@foss.arm.com>
To: "Richard Earnshaw (lists)" <Richard.Earnshaw@arm.com>,
Kyrill Tkachov <kyrylo.tkachov@arm.com>,
Ramana Radhakrishnan <ramana.radhakrishnan@arm.com>,
"gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org" <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH, GCC/ARM] Remove ARMv8-M code for D17-D31
Date: Thu, 06 Jul 2017 12:36:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5da9957f-06bc-11dd-a63a-6bf341b84486@foss.arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <faba24a3-e07d-403d-b3ba-cc725fcdc742@arm.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 863 bytes --]
Hi Richard,
On 28/06/17 16:56, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote:
>>
>
> This is silently baking in dangerous assumptions about GCC's internal
> numbering of the registers. That's not a good idea from a long-term
> portability perspective.
>
> At the very least you need to assert that all the interesting registers
> are numbered in the range 0..63; but ideally the code should just handle
> pretty much any assignment of internal register numbers.
There is already such an assert in my patch. :-)
>
> Did you consider using sbitmaps rather than doing all the multi-word
> stuff by steam?
I did now, most of it is trivial but interaction with compute_not_to_clear_mask
is now more verbose because it returns a bitfield and one assert got quite ugly
and expensive.
Please find an updated patch in attachment and judge by yourself.
Best regards,
Thomas
[-- Attachment #2: remove_d16-d31_armv8m_clearing_code.patch --]
[-- Type: text/x-patch, Size: 5968 bytes --]
diff --git a/gcc/config/arm/arm.c b/gcc/config/arm/arm.c
index 259597d8890ee84c5bd92b12b6f9f6521c8dcd2e..93e152b1f38d3675e4ada1de7a34c2c209d8db1f 100644
--- a/gcc/config/arm/arm.c
+++ b/gcc/config/arm/arm.c
@@ -3620,6 +3620,11 @@ arm_option_override (void)
if (use_cmse && !arm_arch_cmse)
error ("target CPU does not support ARMv8-M Security Extensions");
+ /* We don't clear D16-D31 VFP registers for cmse_nonsecure_call functions
+ and ARMv8-M Baseline and Mainline do not allow such configuration. */
+ if (use_cmse && LAST_VFP_REGNUM > LAST_LO_VFP_REGNUM)
+ error ("ARMv8-M Security Extensions incompatible with selected FPU");
+
/* Disable scheduling fusion by default if it's not armv7 processor
or doesn't prefer ldrd/strd. */
if (flag_schedule_fusion == 2
@@ -24996,42 +25001,41 @@ thumb1_expand_prologue (void)
void
cmse_nonsecure_entry_clear_before_return (void)
{
- uint64_t to_clear_mask[2];
+ sbitmap to_clear_bitmap;
uint32_t padding_bits_to_clear = 0;
uint32_t * padding_bits_to_clear_ptr = &padding_bits_to_clear;
int regno, maxregno = IP_REGNUM;
tree result_type;
rtx result_rtl;
- to_clear_mask[0] = (1ULL << (NUM_ARG_REGS)) - 1;
- to_clear_mask[0] |= (1ULL << IP_REGNUM);
+ to_clear_bitmap = sbitmap_alloc (maxregno + 1);
+ bitmap_clear (to_clear_bitmap);
+ bitmap_set_range (to_clear_bitmap, R0_REGNUM, NUM_ARG_REGS);
+ bitmap_set_bit (to_clear_bitmap, IP_REGNUM);
/* If we are not dealing with -mfloat-abi=soft we will need to clear VFP
registers. We also check that TARGET_HARD_FLOAT and !TARGET_THUMB1 hold
to make sure the instructions used to clear them are present. */
if (TARGET_HARD_FLOAT && !TARGET_THUMB1)
{
- uint64_t float_mask = (1ULL << (D7_VFP_REGNUM + 1)) - 1;
+ int float_bits = D7_VFP_REGNUM - FIRST_VFP_REGNUM + 1;
maxregno = LAST_VFP_REGNUM;
+ to_clear_bitmap = sbitmap_resize (to_clear_bitmap, maxregno, 0);
- float_mask &= ~((1ULL << FIRST_VFP_REGNUM) - 1);
- to_clear_mask[0] |= float_mask;
-
- float_mask = (1ULL << (maxregno - 63)) - 1;
- to_clear_mask[1] = float_mask;
+ bitmap_set_range (to_clear_bitmap, FIRST_VFP_REGNUM, float_bits);
/* Make sure we don't clear the two scratch registers used to clear the
relevant FPSCR bits in output_return_instruction. */
emit_use (gen_rtx_REG (SImode, IP_REGNUM));
- to_clear_mask[0] &= ~(1ULL << IP_REGNUM);
+ bitmap_clear_bit (to_clear_bitmap, IP_REGNUM);
emit_use (gen_rtx_REG (SImode, 4));
- to_clear_mask[0] &= ~(1ULL << 4);
+ bitmap_clear_bit (to_clear_bitmap, 4);
}
/* If the user has defined registers to be caller saved, these are no longer
restored by the function before returning and must thus be cleared for
security purposes. */
- for (regno = NUM_ARG_REGS; regno < LAST_VFP_REGNUM; regno++)
+ for (regno = NUM_ARG_REGS; regno <= maxregno; regno++)
{
/* We do not touch registers that can be used to pass arguments as per
the AAPCS, since these should never be made callee-saved by user
@@ -25041,29 +25045,50 @@ cmse_nonsecure_entry_clear_before_return (void)
if (IN_RANGE (regno, IP_REGNUM, PC_REGNUM))
continue;
if (call_used_regs[regno])
- to_clear_mask[regno / 64] |= (1ULL << (regno % 64));
+ bitmap_set_bit (to_clear_bitmap, regno);
}
/* Make sure we do not clear the registers used to return the result in. */
result_type = TREE_TYPE (DECL_RESULT (current_function_decl));
if (!VOID_TYPE_P (result_type))
{
+ unsigned count;
+ uint64_t to_clear_return_mask;
result_rtl = arm_function_value (result_type, current_function_decl, 0);
/* No need to check that we return in registers, because we don't
support returning on stack yet. */
- to_clear_mask[0]
- &= ~compute_not_to_clear_mask (result_type, result_rtl, 0,
- padding_bits_to_clear_ptr);
+ gcc_assert (REG_P (result_rtl));
+ to_clear_return_mask
+ = compute_not_to_clear_mask (result_type, result_rtl, 0,
+ padding_bits_to_clear_ptr);
+ if (to_clear_return_mask)
+ {
+ gcc_assert (maxregno < sizeof (long long) * __CHAR_BIT__);
+ for (regno = R0_REGNUM; regno <= maxregno; regno++)
+ {
+ if (to_clear_return_mask & (1ULL << regno))
+ bitmap_clear_bit (to_clear_bitmap, regno);
+ }
+ }
}
if (padding_bits_to_clear != 0)
{
rtx reg_rtx;
+ sbitmap to_clear_arg_regs_bitmap, and_bitmap;
+
/* Padding bits to clear is not 0 so we know we are dealing with
returning a composite type, which only uses r0. Let's make sure that
r1-r3 is cleared too, we will use r1 as a scratch register. */
- gcc_assert ((to_clear_mask[0] & 0xe) == 0xe);
+ to_clear_arg_regs_bitmap = sbitmap_alloc (maxregno + 1);
+ bitmap_clear (to_clear_arg_regs_bitmap);
+ and_bitmap = sbitmap_alloc (maxregno + 1);
+ bitmap_clear (and_bitmap);
+ bitmap_set_range (to_clear_arg_regs_bitmap, R0_REGNUM + 1,
+ NUM_ARG_REGS - 1);
+ bitmap_and (and_bitmap, to_clear_arg_regs_bitmap, to_clear_bitmap);
+ gcc_assert (bitmap_equal_p (and_bitmap, to_clear_arg_regs_bitmap));
reg_rtx = gen_rtx_REG (SImode, R1_REGNUM);
@@ -25085,7 +25110,7 @@ cmse_nonsecure_entry_clear_before_return (void)
for (regno = R0_REGNUM; regno <= maxregno; regno++)
{
- if (!(to_clear_mask[regno / 64] & (1ULL << (regno % 64))))
+ if (!bitmap_bit_p (to_clear_bitmap, regno))
continue;
if (IS_VFP_REGNUM (regno))
@@ -25094,7 +25119,7 @@ cmse_nonsecure_entry_clear_before_return (void)
be cleared, use vmov. */
if (TARGET_VFP_DOUBLE
&& VFP_REGNO_OK_FOR_DOUBLE (regno)
- && to_clear_mask[regno / 64] & (1ULL << ((regno % 64) + 1)))
+ && bitmap_bit_p (to_clear_bitmap, regno + 1))
{
emit_move_insn (gen_rtx_REG (DFmode, regno),
CONST1_RTX (DFmode));
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-07-06 12:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-06-20 15:01 Thomas Preudhomme
2017-06-28 15:12 ` [PATCH, GCC/ARM, ping] " Thomas Preudhomme
2017-06-28 15:57 ` [PATCH, GCC/ARM] " Richard Earnshaw (lists)
2017-06-29 8:44 ` Thomas Preudhomme
2017-07-06 12:36 ` Thomas Preudhomme [this message]
2017-07-07 14:19 ` Richard Earnshaw (lists)
2017-07-12 8:59 ` Thomas Preudhomme
2017-07-17 8:52 ` [PATCH, GCC/ARM, ping] " Thomas Preudhomme
2017-07-17 16:25 ` Thomas Preudhomme
2017-08-23 11:01 ` Thomas Preudhomme
2017-08-25 13:23 ` [PATCH, GCC/ARM] " Thomas Preudhomme
2017-09-05 9:04 ` [PATCH, GCC/ARM, ping] " Thomas Preudhomme
2017-09-06 8:12 ` Kyrill Tkachov
2017-09-28 16:13 ` Thomas Preudhomme
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=5da9957f-06bc-11dd-a63a-6bf341b84486@foss.arm.com \
--to=thomas.preudhomme@foss.arm.com \
--cc=Richard.Earnshaw@arm.com \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=kyrylo.tkachov@arm.com \
--cc=ramana.radhakrishnan@arm.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).