From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <SRS0=bD/I=4M=foss.arm.com=Richard.Earnshaw@sourceware.org>
Received: from foss.arm.com (foss.arm.com [217.140.110.172])
	by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CAE6E3845855
	for <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>; Wed, 14 Dec 2022 16:45:13 +0000 (GMT)
DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org CAE6E3845855
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=foss.arm.com
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=foss.arm.com
Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.121.207.14])
	by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D8D6FFEC;
	Wed, 14 Dec 2022 08:45:53 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [10.57.11.95] (unknown [10.57.11.95])
	by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 658003F5A1;
	Wed, 14 Dec 2022 08:45:09 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <e15d5501-73aa-f3ff-e8f4-e80fde9c22d0@foss.arm.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2022 16:45:05 +0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/102.4.2
Subject: Re: [PATCH 10/15 V6] arm: Implement cortex-M return signing address
 codegen
Content-Language: en-GB
To: Andrea Corallo <andrea.corallo@arm.com>
Cc: Andrea Corallo via Gcc-patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>,
 Richard Earnshaw <Richard.Earnshaw@arm.com>, nd <nd@arm.com>
References: <gkrk07dczbq.fsf@arm.com> <gkrczd5bhji.fsf@arm.com>
 <gkr8rmm82c5.fsf_-_@arm.com>
 <ba680c8d-a24f-477e-6a8a-24a1e94daf33@foss.arm.com> <gkrfsfasi1b.fsf@arm.com>
 <gkrleozaov1.fsf_-_@arm.com> <gkra6539m5r.fsf_-_@arm.com>
 <2d22c659-1452-6302-0dd0-270763510950@foss.arm.com>
 <gkr8rjgu0gv.fsf_-_@arm.com>
 <9643aa03-b0d0-6c8b-c668-a1a6e5814c6e@foss.arm.com>
 <gkry1rarli2.fsf_-_@arm.com>
From: Richard Earnshaw <Richard.Earnshaw@foss.arm.com>
In-Reply-To: <gkry1rarli2.fsf_-_@arm.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3489.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,KAM_DMARC_STATUS,KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY,NICE_REPLY_A,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_NONE,TXREP autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org
List-Id: <gcc-patches.gcc.gnu.org>



On 14/12/2022 16:35, Andrea Corallo via Gcc-patches wrote:
> Richard Earnshaw <Richard.Earnshaw@foss.arm.com> writes:
> 
> [...]
> 
>>
>> +      if (TARGET_TPCS_FRAME)
>> +        error ("Return address signing and %<-mtpcs-frame%> are
>> incompatible.");
>>
>> So really this is 'not implemented' rather than not compatible - I
>> don't see why we couldn't implement this if we really wanted to.  It's
>> not worth implementing it because tpcs-frames are very much legacy
>> these days.
>>
>> So the message should use sorry() and say 'is not supported' rather
>> than 'are incompatible'.
>>
>> +(define_insn "pacbti_nop"
>> +  [(set (reg:SI IP_REGNUM)
>> +	(unspec:SI [(reg:SI SP_REGNUM) (reg:SI LR_REGNUM)]
>> +		   VUNSPEC_PACBTI_NOP))]
>>
>> No, this needs to be unspec_volatile, not unspec.
>>
>> +(define_insn "aut_nop"
>> +  [(unspec:SI [(reg:SI IP_REGNUM) (reg:SI SP_REGNUM) (reg:SI LR_REGNUM)]
>> +	      VUNSPEC_AUT_NOP)]
>>
>> Similarly.
>>
>> R.
> 
> 
> Hi Richard & all,
> 
> please find attached the updated patch implementing suggestions.
> 
> BR
> 
>    Andrea
> 
+	(unspec_volatile:SI [(reg:SI SP_REGNUM) (reg:SI LR_REGNUM)]
+		   VUNSPEC_PACBTI_NOP))]

Please fix the indentation of the VUNSPEC_...

+  [(unspec_volatile:SI [(reg:SI IP_REGNUM) (reg:SI SP_REGNUM) (reg:SI 
LR_REGNUM)]
+	      VUNSPEC_AUT_NOP)]

And here.

Otherwise ok with that change.

R.