On 2025-05-25 12:52, Andrew Cooper wrote:
On 25/05/2025 8:34 am, Nicola Vetrini wrote:
On 2025-05-22 15:49, Andrew Cooper wrote:
On 22/05/2025 1:45 pm, Nicola Vetrini wrote:
On 2025-05-21 20:00, Andrew Cooper wrote:
On 21/05/2025 3:36 pm, Andrew Cooper wrote:
diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/include/asm/msr.h
b/xen/arch/x86/include/asm/msr.h
index 0d3b1d637488..4c4f18b3a54d 100644
--- a/xen/arch/x86/include/asm/msr.h
+++ b/xen/arch/x86/include/asm/msr.h
@@ -69,20 +69,20 @@ static inline void wrmsr_ns(uint32_t msr,
uint32_t lo, uint32_t hi)
/* wrmsr with exception handling */
static inline int wrmsr_safe(unsigned int msr, uint64_t val)
{
- int rc;
- uint32_t lo, hi;
- lo = (uint32_t)val;
- hi = (uint32_t)(val >> 32);
-
- __asm__ __volatile__(
- "1: wrmsr\n2:\n"
- ".section .fixup,\"ax\"\n"
- "3: movl %5,%0\n; jmp 2b\n"
- ".previous\n"
- _ASM_EXTABLE(1b, 3b)
- : "=&r" (rc)
- : "c" (msr), "a" (lo), "d" (hi), "0" (0), "i" (-EFAULT));
- return rc;
+ uint32_t lo = val, hi = val >> 32;
+
+ asm_inline goto (
+ "1: wrmsr\n\t"
+ _ASM_EXTABLE(1b, %l[fault])
+ :
+ : "a" (lo), "c" (msr), "d" (hi)
+ :
+ : fault );
+
+ return 0;
+
+ fault:
+ return -EFAULT;
}
It turns out this is the first piece of Eclair-scanned code using
asm
goto.
https://gitlab.com/xen-project/hardware/xen-staging/-/jobs/10108558677
(The run also contained an equivalent change to xsetbv())
We're getting R1.1 and R2.6 violations.
R1.1 complains about [STD.adrslabl] "label address" not being valid
C99.
R2.6 complains about unused labels.
I expect this means that Eclair doesn't know how to interpret asm
goto()
yet. The labels listed are reachable from inside the asm block.
That has been fixed upstream. I'll reach out to you when that fix
trickles down to the runners, so that you're able to test and push
that change.
Oh, fantastic thanks.
I'll hold off pushing until then.
~Andrew
Hi Andrew,
both runners are now updated with the new images, so you can rerun the
tests.
Both Eclair runs are unhappy, and not even completing analysis.
https://gitlab.com/xen-project/hardware/xen-staging/-/pipelines/1835567532
This is the same branch as before, plus your config change for R1.1
~Andrew
There might be something wrong with the image I used, it's erroring on a
speculative call to the compiler. I rolled back to the previous images
(without the fix for R2.6). I will investigate tomorrow.
Thanks,
Nicola
--
Nicola Vetrini, B.Sc.
Software Engineer
BUGSENG (https://bugseng.com)
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/nicola-vetrini-a42471253
