linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 02/26] rewrite READ_ONCE/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] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Thu, 2 Mar 2017 20:00:15 +0100
From:   Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>
To:     Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Cc:     kasan-dev <kasan-dev@...glegroups.com>,
        Andrey Ryabinin <aryabinin@...tuozzo.com>,
        Alexander Potapenko <glider@...gle.com>,
        Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>,
        Networking <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-media@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-wireless <linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org>,
        kernel-build-reports@...ts.linaro.org,
        "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Paul McKenney <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/26] rewrite READ_ONCE/WRITE_ONCE

On 03/02/2017 06:55 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 5:51 PM, Christian Borntraeger
> <borntraeger@...ibm.com> wrote:
>> On 03/02/2017 05:38 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>>>
>>> This attempts a rewrite of the two macros, using a simpler implementation
>>> for the most common case of having a naturally aligned 1, 2, 4, or (on
>>> 64-bit architectures) 8  byte object that can be accessed with a single
>>> instruction.  For these, we go back to a volatile pointer dereference
>>> that we had with the ACCESS_ONCE macro.
>>
>> We had changed that back then because gcc 4.6 and 4.7 had a bug that could
>> removed the volatile statement on aggregate types like the following one
>>
>> union ipte_control {
>>         unsigned long val;
>>         struct {
>>                 unsigned long k  : 1;
>>                 unsigned long kh : 31;
>>                 unsigned long kg : 32;
>>         };
>> };
>>
>> See https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58145
>>
>> If I see that right, your __ALIGNED_WORD(x)
>> macro would say that for above structure  sizeof(x) == sizeof(long)) is true,
>> so it would fall back to the old volatile cast and might reintroduce the
>> old compiler bug?

Oh dear, I should double check my sentences in emails before sending...anyway
the full story is referenced in 

commit 60815cf2e05057db5b78e398d9734c493560b11e
    Merge tag 'for-linus' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/borntraeger/linux
which has a pointer to
http://marc.info/?i=54611D86.4040306%40de.ibm.com
which contains the full story.

> 
> Ah, right, that's the missing piece. For some reason I didn't find
> the reference in the source or the git log.
> 
>> Could you maybe you fence your simple macro for anything older than 4.9? After
>> all there was no kasan support anyway on these older gcc version.
> 
> Yes, that should work, thanks!