Re: [PATCH] powerpc/32: indirect function call use bctrl rather than blrl in ret_from_kernel_thread

[Michael Ellerman]

Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> Copied from commit 89bbe4c798bc ("powerpc/64: indirect function call
> use bctrl rather than blrl in ret_from_kernel_thread")
>
> blrl is not recommended to use as an indirect function call, as it may
> corrupt the link stack predictor.

Do we know if any 32-bit CPUs have a link stack predictor or similar?

cheers

> This is not a performance critical path but this should be fixed for
> consistency.
>
> Signed-off-by: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  arch/powerpc/kernel/entry_32.S | 4 ++--
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kernel/entry_32.S b/arch/powerpc/kernel/entry_32.S
> index 0273a1349006..61fdd53cdd9a 100644
> --- a/arch/powerpc/kernel/entry_32.S
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/kernel/entry_32.S
> @@ -161,10 +161,10 @@ ret_from_fork:
>  ret_from_kernel_thread:
>  	REST_NVGPRS(r1)
>  	bl	schedule_tail
> -	mtlr	r14
> +	mtctr	r14
>  	mr	r3,r15
>  	PPC440EP_ERR42
> -	blrl
> +	bctrl
>  	li	r3,0
>  	b	ret_from_syscall
>  
> -- 
> 2.25.0