linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH resend] linux/compiler.h: fix stale comment on {READ,WRITE}

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20160310144105.a5670cf3e05e308abe24a676@linux-foundation.org>
Date:	Thu, 10 Mar 2016 14:41:05 -0800
From:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Rasmus Villemoes <linux@...musvillemoes.dk>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>,
	Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH resend] linux/compiler.h: fix stale comment on
 {READ,WRITE}_ONCE

On Thu, 10 Mar 2016 01:16:57 +0100 Rasmus Villemoes <linux@...musvillemoes.dk> wrote:

> Commit 7bd3e239d6c6 ("locking: Remove atomicy checks from
> {READ,WRITE}_ONCE") removed said warning.
> 
> Acked-by: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>
> Signed-off-by: Rasmus Villemoes <linux@...musvillemoes.dk>
> ---
> Andrew, can you pick this up please?
> 
>  include/linux/compiler.h | 3 +--
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/include/linux/compiler.h b/include/linux/compiler.h
> index 48f5aab117ae..062b6ad95276 100644
> --- a/include/linux/compiler.h
> +++ b/include/linux/compiler.h
> @@ -263,8 +263,7 @@ static __always_inline void __write_once_size(volatile void *p, void *res, int s
>   * In contrast to ACCESS_ONCE these two macros will also work on aggregate
>   * data types like structs or unions. If the size of the accessed data
>   * type exceeds the word size of the machine (e.g., 32 bits or 64 bits)
> - * READ_ONCE() and WRITE_ONCE()  will fall back to memcpy and print a
> - * compile-time warning.
> + * READ_ONCE() and WRITE_ONCE()  will fall back to memcpy.
>   *
>   * Their two major use cases are: (1) Mediating communication between
>   * process-level code and irq/NMI handlers, all running on the same CPU,

Conflicts with Konrad's patch in linux-next (from an IngoTree), below.

I'll drop your patch - Konrad covers the same info and more.

(grammar nazi: s/There's/There are/)

commit fed0764fafd8e2e629a033c0f7df4106b0dcb7f0
Author:     Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>
AuthorDate: Mon Jan 25 16:33:20 2016 -0500
Commit:     Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
CommitDate: Tue Feb 9 14:50:16 2016 +0100

    locking/atomics: Update comment about READ_ONCE() and structures
    
    The comment is out of data. Also point out the performance drawback
    of the barrier();__builtin_memcpy(); barrier() followed by another
    copy from stack (__u) to lvalue;
    
    Signed-off-by: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>
    Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
    Cc: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
    Cc: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>
    Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
    Cc: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
    Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
    Cc: Sasha Levin <sasha.levin@...cle.com>
    Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
    Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1453757600-11441-1-git-send-email-konrad.wilk@oracle.com
    [ Made it a bit more readable. ]
    Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>

diff --git a/include/linux/compiler.h b/include/linux/compiler.h
index 00b042c..4291592 100644
--- a/include/linux/compiler.h
+++ b/include/linux/compiler.h
@@ -263,8 +263,9 @@ static __always_inline void __write_once_size(volatile void *p, void *res, int s
  * In contrast to ACCESS_ONCE these two macros will also work on aggregate
  * data types like structs or unions. If the size of the accessed data
  * type exceeds the word size of the machine (e.g., 32 bits or 64 bits)
- * READ_ONCE() and WRITE_ONCE()  will fall back to memcpy and print a
- * compile-time warning.
+ * READ_ONCE() and WRITE_ONCE() will fall back to memcpy(). There's at
+ * least two memcpy()s: one for the __builtin_memcpy() and then one for
+ * the macro doing the copy of variable - '__u' allocated on the stack.
  *
  * Their two major use cases are: (1) Mediating communication between
  * process-level code and irq/NMI handlers, all running on the same CPU,