linux-kernel - [PATCH 3/4] compiler.h: remove ACCESS

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: <20171127103824.36526-4-mark.rutland@arm.com>
Date:   Mon, 27 Nov 2017 10:38:23 +0000
From:   Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
To:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...hat.com
Cc:     acme@...hat.com, apw@...onical.com, joe@...ches.com,
        mark.rutland@....com, paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
        peterz@...radead.org
Subject: [PATCH 3/4] compiler.h: remove ACCESS_ONCE()

There are no longer any kernelspace uses of ACCESS_ONCE(), so we can
remove the definition from <linux/compiler.h>.

This patch removes the ACCESS_ONCE() definition, and updates comments
which referred to it. At the same time, some inconsistent and redundant
whitespace is removed from comments.

Signed-off-by: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...hat.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>
Cc: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
Cc: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
---
 include/linux/compiler.h | 47 +++++++++++------------------------------------
 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 36 deletions(-)

diff --git a/include/linux/compiler.h b/include/linux/compiler.h
index 188ed9f65517..52e611ab9a6c 100644
--- a/include/linux/compiler.h
+++ b/include/linux/compiler.h
@@ -220,21 +220,21 @@ static __always_inline void __write_once_size(volatile void *p, void *res, int s
 /*
  * Prevent the compiler from merging or refetching reads or writes. The
  * compiler is also forbidden from reordering successive instances of
- * READ_ONCE, WRITE_ONCE and ACCESS_ONCE (see below), but only when the
- * compiler is aware of some particular ordering.  One way to make the
- * compiler aware of ordering is to put the two invocations of READ_ONCE,
- * WRITE_ONCE or ACCESS_ONCE() in different C statements.
+ * READ_ONCE and WRITE_ONCE, but only when the compiler is aware of some
+ * particular ordering. One way to make the compiler aware of ordering is to
+ * put the two invocations of READ_ONCE or WRITE_ONCE in different C
+ * statements.
  *
- * 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(). 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.
+ * 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(). 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,
- * and (2) Ensuring that the compiler does not  fold, spindle, or otherwise
+ * and (2) Ensuring that the compiler does not fold, spindle, or otherwise
  * mutilate accesses that either do not require ordering or that interact
  * with an explicit memory barrier or atomic instruction that provides the
  * required ordering.
@@ -327,29 +327,4 @@ static __always_inline void __write_once_size(volatile void *p, void *res, int s
 	compiletime_assert(__native_word(t),				\
 		"Need native word sized stores/loads for atomicity.")
 
-/*
- * Prevent the compiler from merging or refetching accesses.  The compiler
- * is also forbidden from reordering successive instances of ACCESS_ONCE(),
- * but only when the compiler is aware of some particular ordering.  One way
- * to make the compiler aware of ordering is to put the two invocations of
- * ACCESS_ONCE() in different C statements.
- *
- * ACCESS_ONCE will only work on scalar types. For union types, ACCESS_ONCE
- * on a union member will work as long as the size of the member matches the
- * size of the union and the size is smaller than word size.
- *
- * The major use cases of ACCESS_ONCE used to be (1) Mediating communication
- * between process-level code and irq/NMI handlers, all running on the same CPU,
- * and (2) Ensuring that the compiler does not  fold, spindle, or otherwise
- * mutilate accesses that either do not require ordering or that interact
- * with an explicit memory barrier or atomic instruction that provides the
- * required ordering.
- *
- * If possible use READ_ONCE()/WRITE_ONCE() instead.
- */
-#define __ACCESS_ONCE(x) ({ \
-	 __maybe_unused typeof(x) __var = (__force typeof(x)) 0; \
-	(volatile typeof(x) *)&(x); })
-#define ACCESS_ONCE(x) (*__ACCESS_ONCE(x))
-
 #endif /* __LINUX_COMPILER_H */
-- 
2.11.0