linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: build warnings after merge of the access

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: <20150326164537.GI24151@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date:	Thu, 26 Mar 2015 17:45:37 +0100
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
	Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	"linux-next@...r.kernel.org" <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>,
	Paul McKenney <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: build warnings after merge of the access_once tree

On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 05:44:42PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 05:36:47PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > Can't we make an argument that these barrier calls are not required? The
> > memcpy() call already guarantees we emit the loads and its opaque so the
> > compiler cannot 'cache' the value. So I see not immediate reason for the
> > dual memory clobber.
> 
> Oh wait, it needs to reassess the content of the target variable after
> the memcpy of course.
> 
> Could we then at least make the 64bit case unconditional as well?

Like so.

---
 include/linux/compiler.h | 16 ----------------
 1 file changed, 16 deletions(-)

diff --git a/include/linux/compiler.h b/include/linux/compiler.h
index 1b45e4a0519b..0e41ca0e5927 100644
--- a/include/linux/compiler.h
+++ b/include/linux/compiler.h
@@ -192,29 +192,16 @@ void ftrace_likely_update(struct ftrace_branch_data *f, int val, int expect);
 
 #include <uapi/linux/types.h>
 
-static __always_inline void data_access_exceeds_word_size(void)
-#ifdef __compiletime_warning
-__compiletime_warning("data access exceeds word size and won't be atomic")
-#endif
-;
-
-static __always_inline void data_access_exceeds_word_size(void)
-{
-}
-
 static __always_inline void __read_once_size(const volatile void *p, void *res, int size)
 {
 	switch (size) {
 	case 1: *(__u8 *)res = *(volatile __u8 *)p; break;
 	case 2: *(__u16 *)res = *(volatile __u16 *)p; break;
 	case 4: *(__u32 *)res = *(volatile __u32 *)p; break;
-#ifdef CONFIG_64BIT
 	case 8: *(__u64 *)res = *(volatile __u64 *)p; break;
-#endif
 	default:
 		barrier();
 		__builtin_memcpy((void *)res, (const void *)p, size);
-		data_access_exceeds_word_size();
 		barrier();
 	}
 }
@@ -225,13 +212,10 @@ static __always_inline void __write_once_size(volatile void *p, void *res, int s
 	case 1: *(volatile __u8 *)p = *(__u8 *)res; break;
 	case 2: *(volatile __u16 *)p = *(__u16 *)res; break;
 	case 4: *(volatile __u32 *)p = *(__u32 *)res; break;
-#ifdef CONFIG_64BIT
 	case 8: *(volatile __u64 *)p = *(__u64 *)res; break;
-#endif
 	default:
 		barrier();
 		__builtin_memcpy((void *)p, (const void *)res, size);
-		data_access_exceeds_word_size();
 		barrier();
 	}
 }
--
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/