Re: [RFC PATCH for 5.2 08/10] rseq/selftests: aarch64 code signature: handle big-endian environment

[Mark Rutland]

On Wed, Apr 24, 2019 at 05:40:33PM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 24, 2019 at 11:25:00AM -0400, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> > +/*
> > + * aarch64 -mbig-endian generates mixed endianness code vs data:
> > + * little-endian code and big-endian data. Ensure the RSEQ_SIG signature
> > + * matches code endianness.
> > + */
> > +#define RSEQ_SIG_CODE	0xd428bc00	/* BRK #0x45E0.  */
> > +
> > +#ifdef __AARCH64EB__
> > +#define RSEQ_SIG_DATA	0x00bc28d4	/* BRK #0x45E0.  */
> > +#else
> > +#define RSEQ_SIG_DATA	RSEQ_SIG_CODE
> > +#endif
> > +
> > +#define RSEQ_SIG	RSEQ_SIG_DATA
> >  
> >  #define rseq_smp_mb()	__asm__ __volatile__ ("dmb ish" ::: "memory")
> >  #define rseq_smp_rmb()	__asm__ __volatile__ ("dmb ishld" ::: "memory")
> > @@ -121,7 +134,7 @@ do {										\
> >  
> >  #define RSEQ_ASM_DEFINE_ABORT(label, abort_label)				\
> >  	"	b	222f\n"							\
> > -	"	.inst 	"	__rseq_str(RSEQ_SIG) "\n"			\
> > +	"	.inst 	"	__rseq_str(RSEQ_SIG_CODE) "\n"			\
> 
> I don't think this is right; the .inst directive _should_ emit the value
> in the instruction stream endianness (i.e. LE, regardless of the data
> endianness).

Now I see the RSEQ_CODE value isn't endian-swapped as teh RSEQ_DATA
value is, so the code above is fine.

Sory for the noise.

Thanks,
Mark.