| 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
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 9 Dec 2016 09:30:11 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
David Gibson <david@...son.dropbear.id.au>,
Liav Rehana <liavr@...lanox.com>,
Chris Metcalf <cmetcalf@...lanox.com>,
Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com>,
Parit Bhargava <prarit@...hat.com>,
Laurent Vivier <lvivier@...hat.com>,
"Christopher S. Hall" <christopher.s.hall@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [patch 5/6] [RFD] timekeeping: Provide optional 128bit math
On Fri, Dec 09, 2016 at 07:38:47AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 09, 2016 at 06:26:38AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > Just for giggles, on tilegx the branch is actually slower than doing the
> > mult unconditionally.
> >
> > The problem is that the two multiplies would otherwise completely
> > pipeline, whereas with the conditional you serialize them.
>
> On my Haswell laptop the unconditional version is faster too.
Only when using x86_64 instructions, once I fixed the i386 variant it
was slower, probably due to register pressure and the like.
> > (came to light while talking about why the mul_u64_u32_shr() fallback
> > didn't work right for them, which was a combination of the above issue
> > and the fact that their compiler 'lost' the fact that these are
> > 32x32->64 mults and did 64x64 ones instead).
>
> Turns out using GCC-6.2.1 we have the same problem on i386, GCC doesn't
> recognise the 32x32 mults and generates crap.
>
> This used to work :/
Do we want something like so?
---
arch/tile/include/asm/Kbuild | 1 -
arch/tile/include/asm/div64.h | 14 ++++++++++++++
arch/x86/include/asm/div64.h | 10 ++++++++++
include/linux/math64.h | 26 ++++++++++++++++++--------
4 files changed, 42 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/tile/include/asm/Kbuild b/arch/tile/include/asm/Kbuild
index 2d1f5638974c..20f2ba6d79be 100644
--- a/arch/tile/include/asm/Kbuild
+++ b/arch/tile/include/asm/Kbuild
@@ -5,7 +5,6 @@ generic-y += bug.h
generic-y += bugs.h
generic-y += clkdev.h
generic-y += cputime.h
-generic-y += div64.h
generic-y += emergency-restart.h
generic-y += errno.h
generic-y += exec.h
diff --git a/arch/tile/include/asm/div64.h b/arch/tile/include/asm/div64.h
index e69de29bb2d1..bf6161966dfa 100644
--- a/arch/tile/include/asm/div64.h
+++ b/arch/tile/include/asm/div64.h
@@ -0,0 +1,14 @@
+#ifndef _ASM_TILE_DIV64_H
+#define _ASM_TILE_DIV64_H
+
+#ifdef __tilegx__
+static inline u64 mul_u32_u32(u32 a, u32 b)
+{
+ return __insn_mul_lu_lu(a, b);
+}
+#define mul_u32_u32 mul_u32_u32
+#endif
+
+#include <asm-generic/div64.h>
+
+#endif /* _ASM_TILE_DIV64_H */
diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/div64.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/div64.h
index ced283ac79df..68f4ae5e8976 100644
--- a/arch/x86/include/asm/div64.h
+++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/div64.h
@@ -59,6 +59,16 @@ static inline u64 div_u64_rem(u64 dividend, u32 divisor, u32 *remainder)
}
#define div_u64_rem div_u64_rem
+static inline u64 mul_u32_u32(u32 a, u32 b)
+{
+ u64 ret;
+
+ asm ("mull %[b]" : "=A" (ret) : [a] "a" (a), [b] "g" (b) );
+
+ return ret;
+}
+#define mul_u32_u32 mul_u32_u32
+
#else
# include <asm-generic/div64.h>
#endif /* CONFIG_X86_32 */
diff --git a/include/linux/math64.h b/include/linux/math64.h
index 6e8b5b270ffe..80690c96c734 100644
--- a/include/linux/math64.h
+++ b/include/linux/math64.h
@@ -133,6 +133,16 @@ static inline s64 div_s64(s64 dividend, s32 divisor)
return ret;
}
+#ifndef mul_u32_u32
+/*
+ * Many a GCC version messes this up and generates a 64x64 mult :-(
+ */
+static inline u64 mul_u32_u32(u32 a, u32 b)
+{
+ return (u64)a * b;
+}
+#endif
+
#if defined(CONFIG_ARCH_SUPPORTS_INT128) && defined(__SIZEOF_INT128__)
#ifndef mul_u64_u32_shr
@@ -160,9 +170,9 @@ static inline u64 mul_u64_u32_shr(u64 a, u32 mul, unsigned int shift)
al = a;
ah = a >> 32;
- ret = ((u64)al * mul) >> shift;
+ ret = mul_u32_u32(al, mul) >> shift;
if (ah)
- ret += ((u64)ah * mul) << (32 - shift);
+ ret += mul_u32_u32(ah, mul) << (32 - shift);
return ret;
}
@@ -186,10 +196,10 @@ static inline u64 mul_u64_u64_shr(u64 a, u64 b, unsigned int shift)
a0.ll = a;
b0.ll = b;
- rl.ll = (u64)a0.l.low * b0.l.low;
- rm.ll = (u64)a0.l.low * b0.l.high;
- rn.ll = (u64)a0.l.high * b0.l.low;
- rh.ll = (u64)a0.l.high * b0.l.high;
+ rl.ll = mul_u32_u32(a0.l.low, b0.l.low);
+ rm.ll = mul_u32_u32(a0.l.low, b0.l.high);
+ rn.ll = mul_u32_u32(a0.l.high, b0.l.low);
+ rh.ll = mul_u32_u32(a0.l.high, b0.l.high);
/*
* Each of these lines computes a 64-bit intermediate result into "c",
@@ -229,8 +239,8 @@ static inline u64 mul_u64_u32_div(u64 a, u32 mul, u32 divisor)
} u, rl, rh;
u.ll = a;
- rl.ll = (u64)u.l.low * mul;
- rh.ll = (u64)u.l.high * mul + rl.l.high;
+ rl.ll = mul_u32_u32(u.l.low, mul);
+ rh.ll = mul_u32_u32(u.l.high, mul) + rl.l.high;
/* Bits 32-63 of the result will be in rh.l.low. */
rl.l.high = do_div(rh.ll, divisor);
Powered by blists - more mailing lists