linux-kernel - Re: [discuss] [PATCH] x86-64: memset optimization

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <200708192024.24864.ak@suse.de>
Date:	Sun, 19 Aug 2007 20:24:24 +0200
From:	Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de>
To:	discuss@...-64.org
Cc:	Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...ux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, jh@...e.cz
Subject: Re: [discuss] [PATCH] x86-64: memset optimization


> I am looking at current source, built with current (non-experimental) GCC
> from Fedora Core 7. If I dissassemble ether_setup, which is
> 
> void ether_setup(struct net_device *dev)
> {
> ...
> 
> 	memset(dev->broadcast, 0xFF, ETH_ALEN);
> }
> 
> I see a tail recursion (jmp) to memset which is the code in arch/x86_64/lib/memset.S

That is likely gcc then deciding it can't use an inline memset for some reason.
It does that for example if it can't figure out the alignment or similar.
Honza (cc'ed) can probably give you more details why it happens, especially if you
give him a preprocessed self contained test case.

A simple example like
char x[6];

f()
{
        memset(x, 1, 6);
}

gives with gcc 4.1:

        .text
        .p2align 4,,15
.globl f
        .type   f, @function
f:
.LFB2:
        movl    $16843009, x(%rip)
        movw    $257, x+4(%rip)
        ret
.LFE2:

-Andi
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/