Re: [PATCH v2 0/7] Module relocation fixes and asm/insn.h header

[Palmer Dabbelt]

On Mon, 31 Jan 2022 10:27:13 PST (-0800), kernel@xxxxxxxx wrote:
> Apologies! I messed up v1. Please consider this patch set only.
>
> The first patch removes a bunch of code from the asm/module.h which is
> included in almost all drivers through linux/module.h. Next are two
> patches to fix unaligned access when doing module relocations and do
> proper range checks for auipc+jalr offsets.
>
> I'm a little less confident about the following patches, so consider
> this more of an RFC for those. The idea is to consolidate the RISC-V
> instruction generation and manipulation similar to arm64's asm/insn.h
> header.
>
> /Emil
>
> Emil Renner Berthing (7):
>   riscv: Remove unneeded definitions from asm/module.h
>   riscv: Avoid unaligned access when relocating modules
>   riscv: Fix auipc+jalr relocation range checks
>   riscv: Add asm/insn.h header
>   riscv: Use asm/insn.h for module relocations
>   riscv: Use asm/insn.h to generate plt entries
>   riscv: Use asm/insn.h for jump labels
>
>  arch/riscv/include/asm/insn.h       | 121 ++++++++++++++
>  arch/riscv/include/asm/module.h     |  87 ----------
>  arch/riscv/kernel/jump_label.c      |  12 +-
>  arch/riscv/kernel/module-sections.c |  71 +++++++++
>  arch/riscv/kernel/module.c          | 237 +++++++++++++---------------
>  5 files changed, 306 insertions(+), 222 deletions(-)
>  create mode 100644 arch/riscv/include/asm/insn.h

These generally look good to me, though there's a lot of bit-field 
twiddling so I'll take another look before merging it.  There's a 
handful of minor issues:

* There's a fix in here, mixed into the cleanups.  It's generally best 
 to split those out.
* There's another copy of the insn patterns in our BPF JIT, it'd be nice 
 to clean that up too.  That can be a follow-on, though.
* It's 2022, but there's some 2020 copyrights.  If this really is old 
 stuff that's OK, I just wanted to check.

I'm usually OK just re-ordering patches myself, but I figured I'd have 
to ask about the copyright dates anyway.  LMK if you want to send a v2 
with the fix pulled to the front, and what you want me to do about the 
copyright dates (if you're going to send a v2 then just fix them, but if 
you're not then just telling me is OK).

Thanks!