Re: [PATCH] x86/mm: fix objtool failure with KMSAN enabled
Peter Zijlstra <[email protected]> Thu, 2 Jul 2026 13:15:50 +0200
| Newsgroups | org.kernel.vger.linux-toolchains,dev.linux.lists.llvm,org.kernel.vger.linux-kernel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Thu, Jul 02, 2026 at 12:41:09PM +0200, Dmitry Voytik wrote: > Hi Borislav, > > On Thu, Jul 2, 2026 at 4:54 AM Borislav Petkov <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On Wed, Jul 01, 2026 at 02:51:51PM +0200, Dmitry Voytik wrote: > > > This patch fixes broken builds with defconfig + CONFIG_KMSAN + > > > CONFIG_DEBUG_INFO_*. > > > > > > To reproduce the issue before the fix: > > > make mrproper > > > make LLVM=1 defconfig > > > ./scripts/config -e CONFIG_KMSAN \ > > > -e CONFIG_DEBUG_INFO_DWARF_TOOLCHAIN_DEFAULT > > > make LLVM=1 olddefconfig > > > make LLVM=1 -j(nproc) vmlinux > > > ... > > > LD vmlinux.o > > > vmlinux.o: warning: objtool: folio_zero_user+0x801: undefined stack state > > > vmlinux.o: error: objtool: folio_zero_user+0x801: unknown CFA base reg -1 > > > make[2]: *** [scripts/Makefile.vmlinux_o:76: vmlinux.o] Error 255 > > > > > > objtool in verbose mode shows how the frame pointer is omitted: > > > make LLVM=1 OBJTOOL_VERBOSE=1 -j(nproc) vmlinux > > > ... > > > b15a2c: folio_zero_user+0x7fc xor %eax,%eax > > > b15a2e: folio_zero_user+0x7fe mov %rcx,%rsp > > > b15a31: folio_zero_user+0x801 mov %r14,%rdi > > > b15a34: folio_zero_user+0x804 mov %rbx,%rcx > > > b15a37: folio_zero_user+0x807 call 0xb15a3c <__clear_pages_unrol > > > > > > After the fix, the frame pointer is back: > > > b15a37: 31 c0 xor %eax,%eax > > > b15a39: 48 89 ec mov %rbp,%rsp > > > b15a3c: 4c 89 f7 mov %r14,%rdi > > > b15a3f: 48 89 d9 mov %rbx,%rcx > > > b15a42: e8 00 00 00 00 call b15a47 <folio_zero_user+0x817> > > > > > > It seems the issue was introduced by > > > commit 54a6b89a3db2 ("x86/mm: simplify clear_page_*") > > > > > > The actual fix is to revert the change how ASM_CALL_CONSTRAINT is > > > positioned. > > > > Why? > > > > Where does it say that the current stack ptr dependency needs to be the first > > asm input operand? > > Very good question. My uneducated guess - bugs in clang. > Out of curiosity, I compared (see below) what clang and gcc do when > ASM_CALL_CONSTRAINT moves around, and it indeed affects generated > code, which is weird. > I might just be holding it wrong, like optimization must be on, etc. > > > If that were the case, we have a bunch more of those bugs around the tree. > > At least, it makes objtool happy for the defconfig + KMSAN. Yeah, for all the wrong reasons. AFAICT it is one clang bug causing another clang bug to manifest less onerous. This ASM_CALL_CONSTRAINT placement is, for some reason, forcing a stack frame (which is not in fact required), but having a stack frame then avoids the absolutely retarded: mov %rsp, %rcx; 1: mov %rcx, %rsp ... mov %rsp, disp(%rsp) call __msam_foo mov disp(%rsp), %rcx test je 1b construct. Becaus having the stack frame (rbp) then makes all the rsp juggling less of a problem. So on the one hand the __msan 'functions' are special annotated in clang to force re-align the stack. Then it notices the stack is already properly aligned and the actual stack alignment code goes missing, BUT it keeps the save/restore rsp (for raisins). It then furher compounds the failure by spilling the RSP copy onto the stack, and voila, total and utter insanity. I suspect you can simply remove that magic annotate for KMSAM, kernel stacks are always aligned, there no point, what-so-ever, to do the whole save/align/restore thing. There is also this thread from last year, which looks to be a similar/same problem: https://lore.kernel.org/174108458405.14745.4864877018394987266.tip-bot2@tip-bot2 those patches never made it in, Josh was going to rework, but that never quite happened either. And I think we need to, at least temporarily, deal with this, until a fixed clang is released and we can make KMSAN depend on that version, but I worry about the impact of this change on !KMSAN builds. A quick test with folio_zero_user() seems to suggest the ASM_CALL_CONSTRAINT movement (your patch) generates the same code for defconfg as does the unmodified code. The change from the thread linked above (input constraint on __builtin_frame_address(0)) generates different code. A third option is to force FRAME_POINTER=y for KMSAN builds -- for now, until clang is taught to be less insane.