linux-kernel - [PATCH] x86: Add an explicit barrier() to clflushopt()

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Message-Id: <1445248735-11915-1-git-send-email-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Date:	Mon, 19 Oct 2015 10:58:55 +0100
From:	Chris Wilson <chris@...is-wilson.co.uk>
To:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:	Chris Wilson <chris@...is-wilson.co.uk>,
	Ross Zwisler <ross.zwisler@...ux.intel.com>,
	"H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@...ux.intel.com>,
	Imre Deak <imre.deak@...el.com>,
	Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@...ll.ch>,
	dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org
Subject: [PATCH] x86: Add an explicit barrier() to clflushopt()

During testing we observed that the last cacheline was not being flushed
from a

	mb()
	for (addr = addr & -clflush_size; addr < end; addr += clflush_size)
		clflushopt();
	mb()

loop (where the initial addr and end were not cacheline aligned).

Changing the loop from addr < end to addr <= end, or replacing the
clflushopt() with clflush() both fixed the testcase. Hinting that GCC
was miscompling the assembly within the loop and specifically the
alternative within clflushopt() was confusing the loop optimizer.

Adding a barrier() into clflushopt() is enough for GCC to dtrt, but
solving why GCC is not seeing the constraints from the alternative_io()
would be smarter...

Bugzilla: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=92501
Testcase: gem_tiled_partial_pwrite_pread/read
Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@...is-wilson.co.uk>
Cc: Ross Zwisler <ross.zwisler@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: H. Peter Anvin <hpa@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: Imre Deak <imre.deak@...el.com>
Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@...ll.ch>
Cc: dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org
---
 arch/x86/include/asm/special_insns.h | 5 +++++
 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)

diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/special_insns.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/special_insns.h
index 2270e41b32fd..0c7aedbf8930 100644
--- a/arch/x86/include/asm/special_insns.h
+++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/special_insns.h
@@ -199,6 +199,11 @@ static inline void clflushopt(volatile void *__p)
 		       ".byte 0x66; clflush %P0",
 		       X86_FEATURE_CLFLUSHOPT,
 		       "+m" (*(volatile char __force *)__p));
+	/* GCC (4.9.1 and 5.2.1 at least) appears to be very confused when
+	 * meeting this alternative() and demonstrably miscompiles loops
+	 * iterating over clflushopts.
+	 */
+	barrier();
 }
 
 static inline void clwb(volatile void *__p)
-- 
2.6.1

--
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/