| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <CAK7LNAQjZP8mYD02+=uvzO135fTB5GyU7_snV7ymFAjMBsep8w@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2018 23:33:59 +0900
From: Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Cc: X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
"H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Richard Biener <rguenther@...e.de>,
Segher Boessenkool <segher@...nel.crashing.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Juergen Gross <jgross@...e.com>,
Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Andrey Ryabinin <aryabinin@...tuozzo.com>,
virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
Luc Van Oostenryck <luc.vanoostenryck@...il.com>,
Alok Kataria <akataria@...are.com>,
Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>,
Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>,
linux-arch <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>,
linux-sparse@...r.kernel.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Linux Kbuild mailing list <linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org>,
Yonghong Song <yhs@...com>,
Michal Marek <michal.lkml@...kovi.net>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...hat.com>,
Jan Beulich <JBeulich@...e.com>, Nadav Amit <namit@...are.com>,
David Woodhouse <dwmw@...zon.co.uk>,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 00/12] x86, kbuild: revert macrofying inline assembly code
On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 9:44 PM Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org> wrote:
>
>
> * Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com> wrote:
>
> > This series reverts the in-kernel workarounds for inlining issues.
> >
> > The commit description of 77b0bf55bc67 mentioned
> > "We also hope that GCC will eventually get fixed,..."
> >
> > Now, GCC provides a solution.
> >
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Extended-Asm.html
> > explains the new "asm inline" syntax.
> >
> > The performance issue will be eventually solved.
> >
> > [About Code cleanups]
> >
> > I know Nadam Amit is opposed to the full revert.
> > He also claims his motivation for macrofying was not only
> > performance, but also cleanups.
> >
> > IIUC, the criticism addresses the code duplication between C and ASM.
> >
> > If so, I'd like to suggest a different approach for cleanups.
> > Please see the last 3 patches.
> > IMHO, preprocessor approach is more straight-forward, and readable.
> > Basically, this idea should work because it is what we already do for
> > __ASM_FORM() etc.
> >
> > [Quick Test of "asm inline" of GCC 9]
> >
> > If you want to try "asm inline" feature, the patch is available:
> > https://lore.kernel.org/patchwork/patch/1024590/
> >
> > The number of symbols for arch/x86/configs/x86_64_defconfig:
> >
> > nr_symbols
> > [1] v4.20-rc7 : 96502
> > [2] [1]+full revert : 96705 (+203)
> > [3] [2]+"asm inline": 96568 (-137)
> >
> > [3]: apply my patch, then replace "asm" -> "asm_inline"
> > for _BUG_FLAGS(), refcount_add(), refcount_inc(), refcount_dec(),
> > annotate_reachable(), annotate_unreachable()
> >
> >
> > Changes in v3:
> > - Split into per-commit revert (per Nadav Amit)
> > - Add some cleanups with preprocessor approach
> >
> > Changes in v2:
> > - Revive clean-ups made by 5bdcd510c2ac (per Peter Zijlstra)
> > - Fix commit quoting style (per Peter Zijlstra)
> >
> > Masahiro Yamada (12):
> > Revert "x86/jump-labels: Macrofy inline assembly code to work around
> > GCC inlining bugs"
> > Revert "x86/cpufeature: Macrofy inline assembly code to work around
> > GCC inlining bugs"
> > Revert "x86/extable: Macrofy inline assembly code to work around GCC
> > inlining bugs"
> > Revert "x86/paravirt: Work around GCC inlining bugs when compiling
> > paravirt ops"
> > Revert "x86/bug: Macrofy the BUG table section handling, to work
> > around GCC inlining bugs"
> > Revert "x86/alternatives: Macrofy lock prefixes to work around GCC
> > inlining bugs"
> > Revert "x86/refcount: Work around GCC inlining bug"
> > Revert "x86/objtool: Use asm macros to work around GCC inlining bugs"
> > Revert "kbuild/Makefile: Prepare for using macros in inline assembly
> > code to work around asm() related GCC inlining bugs"
> > linux/linkage: add ASM() macro to reduce duplication between C/ASM
> > code
> > x86/alternatives: consolidate LOCK_PREFIX macro
> > x86/asm: consolidate ASM_EXTABLE_* macros
> >
> > Makefile | 9 +--
> > arch/x86/Makefile | 7 ---
> > arch/x86/include/asm/alternative-asm.h | 22 +------
> > arch/x86/include/asm/alternative-common.h | 47 +++++++++++++++
> > arch/x86/include/asm/alternative.h | 30 +---------
> > arch/x86/include/asm/asm.h | 46 +++++----------
> > arch/x86/include/asm/bug.h | 98 +++++++++++++------------------
> > arch/x86/include/asm/cpufeature.h | 82 +++++++++++---------------
> > arch/x86/include/asm/jump_label.h | 22 +++++--
> > arch/x86/include/asm/paravirt_types.h | 56 +++++++++---------
> > arch/x86/include/asm/refcount.h | 81 +++++++++++--------------
> > arch/x86/kernel/macros.S | 16 -----
> > include/asm-generic/bug.h | 8 +--
> > include/linux/compiler.h | 56 ++++--------------
> > include/linux/linkage.h | 8 +++
> > scripts/Kbuild.include | 4 +-
> > scripts/mod/Makefile | 2 -
> > 17 files changed, 249 insertions(+), 345 deletions(-)
> > create mode 100644 arch/x86/include/asm/alternative-common.h
> > delete mode 100644 arch/x86/kernel/macros.S
>
> I absolutely agree that this needs to be resolved in v4.20.
>
> So I did the 1-9 reverts manually myself as well, because I think the
> first commit should be reverted fully to get as close to the starting
> point as possible (we are late in the cycle) - and came to the attached
> interdiff between your series and mine.
>
> Does this approach look OK to you, or did I miss something?
It looks OK to me.
I thought the diff was a good cleanup part,
but we can deal with it later on,
so I do not mind it.
Thanks!
> Thanks,
>
> Ingo
>
> =============>
>
> entry/calling.h | 2 -
> include/asm/jump_label.h | 50 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------
> 2 files changed, 38 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/entry/calling.h b/arch/x86/entry/calling.h
> index 25e5a6bda8c3..20d0885b00fb 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/entry/calling.h
> +++ b/arch/x86/entry/calling.h
> @@ -352,7 +352,7 @@ For 32-bit we have the following conventions - kernel is built with
> .macro CALL_enter_from_user_mode
> #ifdef CONFIG_CONTEXT_TRACKING
> #ifdef HAVE_JUMP_LABEL
> - STATIC_BRANCH_JMP l_yes=.Lafter_call_\@, key=context_tracking_enabled, branch=1
> + STATIC_JUMP_IF_FALSE .Lafter_call_\@, context_tracking_enabled, def=0
> #endif
> call enter_from_user_mode
> .Lafter_call_\@:
> diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/jump_label.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/jump_label.h
> index cf88ebf9a4ca..21efc9d07ed9 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/jump_label.h
> +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/jump_label.h
> @@ -2,6 +2,19 @@
> #ifndef _ASM_X86_JUMP_LABEL_H
> #define _ASM_X86_JUMP_LABEL_H
>
> +#ifndef HAVE_JUMP_LABEL
> +/*
> + * For better or for worse, if jump labels (the gcc extension) are missing,
> + * then the entire static branch patching infrastructure is compiled out.
> + * If that happens, the code in here will malfunction. Raise a compiler
> + * error instead.
> + *
> + * In theory, jump labels and the static branch patching infrastructure
> + * could be decoupled to fix this.
> + */
> +#error asm/jump_label.h included on a non-jump-label kernel
> +#endif
> +
> #define JUMP_LABEL_NOP_SIZE 5
>
> #ifdef CONFIG_X86_64
> @@ -53,26 +66,37 @@ static __always_inline bool arch_static_branch_jump(struct static_key *key, bool
>
> #else /* __ASSEMBLY__ */
>
> -.macro STATIC_BRANCH_NOP l_yes:req key:req branch:req
> -.Lstatic_branch_nop_\@:
> - .byte STATIC_KEY_INIT_NOP
> -.Lstatic_branch_no_after_\@:
> +.macro STATIC_JUMP_IF_TRUE target, key, def
> +.Lstatic_jump_\@:
> + .if \def
> + /* Equivalent to "jmp.d32 \target" */
> + .byte 0xe9
> + .long \target - .Lstatic_jump_after_\@
> +.Lstatic_jump_after_\@:
> + .else
> + .byte STATIC_KEY_INIT_NOP
> + .endif
> .pushsection __jump_table, "aw"
> _ASM_ALIGN
> - .long .Lstatic_branch_nop_\@ - ., \l_yes - .
> - _ASM_PTR \key + \branch - .
> + .long .Lstatic_jump_\@ - ., \target - .
> + _ASM_PTR \key - .
> .popsection
> .endm
>
> -.macro STATIC_BRANCH_JMP l_yes:req key:req branch:req
> -.Lstatic_branch_jmp_\@:
> - .byte 0xe9
> - .long \l_yes - .Lstatic_branch_jmp_after_\@
> -.Lstatic_branch_jmp_after_\@:
> +.macro STATIC_JUMP_IF_FALSE target, key, def
> +.Lstatic_jump_\@:
> + .if \def
> + .byte STATIC_KEY_INIT_NOP
> + .else
> + /* Equivalent to "jmp.d32 \target" */
> + .byte 0xe9
> + .long \target - .Lstatic_jump_after_\@
> +.Lstatic_jump_after_\@:
> + .endif
> .pushsection __jump_table, "aw"
> _ASM_ALIGN
> - .long .Lstatic_branch_jmp_\@ - ., \l_yes - .
> - _ASM_PTR \key + \branch - .
> + .long .Lstatic_jump_\@ - ., \target - .
> + _ASM_PTR \key + 1 - .
> .popsection
> .endm
>
>
--
Best Regards
Masahiro Yamada
Powered by blists - more mailing lists