linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v6 2/5] lib: implement __arch

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: <70fd505b-5a53-c380-8b9e-341f2be84e2d@gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 20 Dec 2016 09:22:11 -0800
From:   Joshua Clayton <stillcompiling@...il.com>
To:     Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>
Cc:     Alan Tull <atull@...nsource.altera.com>,
        Moritz Fischer <moritz.fischer@...us.com>,
        Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
        Shawn Guo <shawnguo@...nel.org>,
        Sascha Hauer <kernel@...gutronix.de>,
        Fabio Estevam <fabio.estevam@....com>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Anatolij Gustschin <agust@...x.de>, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-fpga@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 2/5] lib: implement __arch_bitrev8x4()

Will,


On 12/19/2016 02:06 AM, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 03:17:51PM -0800, Joshua Clayton wrote:
>> Implement faster bitrev8x4() for arm, arm64 and mips, all the platforms
>> with CONFIG_HAVE_ARCH_BITREVERSE.
>> ARM platforms just need a byteswap added to the existing __arch_bitrev32()
>> Amusingly, the mips implementation is exactly the opposite, requiring
>> removal of the byteswap from its __arch_bitrev32()
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Joshua Clayton <stillcompiling@...il.com>
>> ---
>>  arch/arm/include/asm/bitrev.h   | 6 ++++++
>>  arch/arm64/include/asm/bitrev.h | 6 ++++++
>>  arch/mips/include/asm/bitrev.h  | 6 ++++++
>>  include/linux/bitrev.h          | 1 +
>>  4 files changed, 19 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm/include/asm/bitrev.h b/arch/arm/include/asm/bitrev.h
>> index ec291c3..9482f78 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm/include/asm/bitrev.h
>> +++ b/arch/arm/include/asm/bitrev.h
>> @@ -17,4 +17,10 @@ static __always_inline __attribute_const__ u8 __arch_bitrev8(u8 x)
>>  	return __arch_bitrev32((u32)x) >> 24;
>>  }
>>  
>> +static __always_inline __attribute_const__ u32 __arch_bitrev8x4(u32 x)
>> +{
>> +	__asm__ ("rbit %0, %1; rev %0, %0" : "=r" (x) : "r" (x));
>> +	return x;
>> +}
>> +
>>  #endif
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/bitrev.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/bitrev.h
>> index a5a0c36..1801078 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/bitrev.h
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/bitrev.h
>> @@ -16,4 +16,10 @@ static __always_inline __attribute_const__ u8 __arch_bitrev8(u8 x)
>>  	return __arch_bitrev32((u32)x) >> 24;
>>  }
>>  
>> +static __always_inline __attribute_const__ u32 __arch_bitrev8x4(u32 x)
>> +{
>> +	__asm__ ("rbit %0, %1; rev %0, %0" : "=r" (x) : "r" (x));
> This is broken -- you're operating on 64-bit registers. I only noticed
> because if you write:
Ugh. mea culpa. I squinted at the AARCH64 asm and erroneously
believed it to be the same as arm.
>   swab32(bitrev32(x))
>
> then GCC generates:
>
>   rbit	w0, w0
>   rev	w0, w0
>
> so perhaps we should just implement the asm-generic version like that
> and not bother with the arch-specific stuff?
>
> Will
You are so right.
That is exactly what I will do.

Thanks,

Joshua